Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Jan 31;19(1):25.
doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0600-0.

Improving Reporting of Meta-Ethnography: The eMERGe Reporting Guidance

Free PMC article

Improving Reporting of Meta-Ethnography: The eMERGe Reporting Guidance

Emma F France et al. BMC Med Res Methodol. .
Free PMC article


Aims: The aim of this study was to provide guidance to improve the completeness and clarity of meta-ethnography reporting.

Background: Evidence-based policy and practice require robust evidence syntheses which can further understanding of people's experiences and associated social processes. Meta-ethnography is a rigorous seven-phase qualitative evidence synthesis methodology, developed by Noblit and Hare. Meta-ethnography is used widely in health research, but reporting is often poor quality and this discourages trust in and use of its findings. Meta-ethnography reporting guidance is needed to improve reporting quality.

Design: The eMERGe study used a rigorous mixed-methods design and evidence-based methods to develop the novel reporting guidance and explanatory notes.

Methods: The study, conducted from 2015 to 2017, comprised of: (1) a methodological systematic review of guidance for meta-ethnography conduct and reporting; (2) a review and audit of published meta-ethnographies to identify good practice principles; (3) international, multidisciplinary consensus-building processes to agree guidance content; (4) innovative development of the guidance and explanatory notes.

Findings: Recommendations and good practice for all seven phases of meta-ethnography conduct and reporting were newly identified leading to 19 reporting criteria and accompanying detailed guidance.

Conclusion: The bespoke eMERGe Reporting Guidance, which incorporates new methodological developments and advances the methodology, can help researchers to report the important aspects of meta-ethnography. Use of the guidance should raise reporting quality. Better reporting could make assessments of confidence in the findings more robust and increase use of meta-ethnography outputs to improve practice, policy, and service user outcomes in health and other fields. This is the first tailored reporting guideline for meta-ethnography. This article is being simultaneously published in the following journals: Journal of Advanced Nursing, Psycho-oncology, Review of Education, and BMC Medical Research Methodology.

Keywords: Guideline; Meta-ethnography; Nursing; Publication standards; Qualitative evidence synthesis; Qualitative research; Reporting; Research design; Systematic review.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests

Catherine Pope is an author of the book Pope C, Mays N, Popay J. Synthesizing qualitative and quantitative health evidence: a guide to methods. Buckingham: Open University Press 2007 which discusses meta-ethnography; she receives royalties from this. Jane Noyes is a Journal of Advanced Nursing Editor. She was recused from the Journal of Advanced Nursing management of this paper. No conflict of interest has been declared by the remaining author(s).

Publisher’s Note

This article is being simultaneously published in the Journal of Advanced Nursing, Psycho-oncology, Review of Education, and BMC Medical Research Methodology. The article followed a double-blind peer-review model managed by the Journal of Advanced Nursing, and the editors from each of the journals in question consolidated on the decision process.


Fig 1
Fig 1
Guidance development flowchart

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 5 articles


    1. Noyes J, Booth A, Flemming K, Garside R, Harden A, Lewin S, et al. Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series-paper 3: methods for assessing methodological limitations, data extraction and synthesis and confidence in synthesized qualitative findings. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;97:49–58. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.020. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Uny I, France EF, Noblit GW. Steady and delayed: explaining the different development of meta-ethnography in health care and education. Ethnogr Educ. 2017;12(2):243–257. doi: 10.1080/17457823.2017.1282320. - DOI
    1. Noyes J, Lewin S. Chapter 6: Supplemental guidance on selecting a method of qualitative evidence synthesis and integrating qualitative evidence with cochrane intervention reviews. In: Noyes J, Booth A, Hannes K, Harden A, Harris J, Lewin S, Lockwood C, editors. Supplementary guidance for inclusion of qualitative research in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions. Version 1 (updated august 2011): Cochrane Collaboration Qualitative Methods Group; 2011. Available from:
    1. Booth A, Carroll C, Ilott I, Low LL, Cooper K. Desperately seeking dissonance: identifying the disconfirming case in qualitative evidence synthesis. Qual Health Res. 2013;23(1):126–141. doi: 10.1177/1049732312466295. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Noyes J, Lewin S. Supplementary Guidance for Inclusion of Qualitative Research in Cochrane Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 1 (updated August 2011). In: Noyes J, Booth A, Hannes K, Harden A, Harris J, Lewin S, Lockwood C, editors. Chapter 6: Supplemental Guidance on Selecting a Method of Qualitative Evidence Synthesis, and Integrating Qualitative Evidence with Cochrane Intervention Reviews. Cochrane Collaboration Qualitative Methods Group; 2011. Available:

Publication types

MeSH terms