EDI in Qualitative Systematic Reviews
Study prompts update to JBI methodology
A methodological scoping review revealed that Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) are not being addressed in an explicit or systematic manner in the process of conducting and reporting qualitative systematic reviews that use JBI guidelines.
The study, published by members of the JBI Qualitative Reviews Methodology Group, aimed to investigate how qualitative review teams are incorporating EDI within their reviews.
Limitations in qualitative systematic review conduct
The findings indicate several limitations in current qualitative evidence synthesis practice concerning EDI. The majority of reviews (69.8%) framed their research questions and aims in a generic/universal way rather than focusing on EDI-related issues. While a small number of reviews (six) justified their population focus based on EDI concerns, and even fewer (one) included a knowledge user in the review process, the sociodemographic and other key characteristics of the samples in the underpinning studies were poorly reported.
This lack of detailed reporting makes it challenging to discern EDI-related issues or to undertake EDI-related analyses.
Further analysis revealed that while any reviews mentioned reflexivity in relation to the quality assessment of included studies, few provided in-depth analytical consideration of their own reflexivity as review teams.
Only a minority of reviews (23.3%) demonstrated an element of intersectional or critical approaches in their analysis by explicitly considering issues of power and/or representation.
Addressing limitations in qualitative evidence synthesis
The authors conclude that without closer attention to EDI, qualitative evidence synthesis risk amplifying existing gaps and inequitable knowledge claims. They offer initial suggestions to qualitative evidence synthesis teams systematically embed EDI within their methods and practices, hoping to enhance the ability of review outputs to address questions of health equity.
Following the methodological scoping review, the JBI Qualitative Reviews Methodology Group has developed further guidance in this critical area, which is available in the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis.
Resources
Evans, Catrin; Hassanein, Zeinab M.; Bains, Manpreet; Bennett, Clare; Bjerrum, Merete; Edgley, Alison; Edwards, Deborah; Porritt, Kylie; Salmond, Susan
JBI Evidence Synthesis. 23(3):454-479, March 2025.
JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis – Qualitative Systematic Reviews