3.3.10 Selecting qualitative studies

The selection of qualitative studies involves a meticulous process to ensure comprehensiveness and accuracy, and is performed based on the eligibility criteria developed earlier in the review process. Initially, all records identified through literature searches are collated and duplicates are systematically removed using either a manual or software-based method. To maintain a high level of rigour, both title and abstract screening, as well as full-text screening, should be conducted independently by two reviewers. In cases where discrepancies arise between the reviewers, a third reviewer should be consulted to provide additional input. As a proactive measure to enhance the reliability of the screening process, pilot screening is recommended at both stages of screening. JBI reviewers are encouraged to read the article by Porritt, Gomersall and Lockwood (2014) regarding study selection and critical appraisal.

During study selection in a qualitative systematic review, challenges can arise in determining study eligibility, especially when studies include populations or contexts that partially align with and extend beyond the eligibility criteria. For example, a study may include both adults and 17-year-olds when the review focuses solely on adults, or it may examine the experiences of nurses alongside nursing students while the review is limited to a nurse’s perspective.

In such cases, the review team may choose to include papers that extend beyond the eligibility criteria if the data relevant to the review focus can be clearly separated and extracted. Alternatively, they may exclude studies when such data cannot be isolated, or they may decide to include studies regardless of whether specific data can be extracted separately. Whichever approach is adopted, transparent documentation and justification of these decisions are essential to ensure consistency and rigour throughout the review process.

There is no single rule for managing these cases; instead, each instance should be carefully assessed, collectively discussed, and documented by the review team to ensure clarity in applying inclusion criteria.