The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers

Quan Nha Hong, Sergi Fàbregues, Gillian Bartlett, Felicity Boardman, Margaret Cargo, Pierre Dagenais, Marie Pierre Gagnon, Frances Griffiths, Belinda Nicolau, Alicia O'Cathain, Marie Claude Rousseau, Isabelle Vedel, Pierre Pluye

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Appraising the quality of studies included in systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence is challenging. To address this challenge, a critical appraisal tool was developed: the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The aim of this paper is to present the enhancements made to the MMAT. DEVELOPMENT: The MMAT was initially developed in 2006 based on a literature review on systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence. It was subject to pilot and interrater reliability testing. A revised version of the MMAT was developed in 2018 based on the results from usefulness testing, a literature review on critical appraisal tools and a modified e-Delphi study with methodological experts to identify core criteria. TOOL DESCRIPTION: The MMAT assesses the quality of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies. It focuses on methodological criteria and includes five core quality criteria for each of the following five categories of study designs: (a) qualitative, (b) randomized controlled, (c) nonrandomized, (d) quantitative descriptive, and (e) mixed methods. CONCLUSION: The MMAT is a unique tool that can be used to appraise the quality of different study designs. Also, by limiting to core criteria, the MMAT can provide a more efficient appraisal.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)285-291
Number of pages7
JournalEducation for Information
Volume34
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2018

Fingerprint

Testing
evidence
expert
literature

Cite this

Hong, Q. N., Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F., Cargo, M., Dagenais, P., ... Pluye, P. (2018). The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. Education for Information, 34(4), 285-291. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-180221
Hong, Quan Nha ; Fàbregues, Sergi ; Bartlett, Gillian ; Boardman, Felicity ; Cargo, Margaret ; Dagenais, Pierre ; Gagnon, Marie Pierre ; Griffiths, Frances ; Nicolau, Belinda ; O'Cathain, Alicia ; Rousseau, Marie Claude ; Vedel, Isabelle ; Pluye, Pierre. / The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. In: Education for Information. 2018 ; Vol. 34, No. 4. pp. 285-291.
@article{f020a00e08244c4faceb91b10b9eb82b,
title = "The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers",
abstract = "INTRODUCTION: Appraising the quality of studies included in systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence is challenging. To address this challenge, a critical appraisal tool was developed: the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The aim of this paper is to present the enhancements made to the MMAT. DEVELOPMENT: The MMAT was initially developed in 2006 based on a literature review on systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence. It was subject to pilot and interrater reliability testing. A revised version of the MMAT was developed in 2018 based on the results from usefulness testing, a literature review on critical appraisal tools and a modified e-Delphi study with methodological experts to identify core criteria. TOOL DESCRIPTION: The MMAT assesses the quality of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies. It focuses on methodological criteria and includes five core quality criteria for each of the following five categories of study designs: (a) qualitative, (b) randomized controlled, (c) nonrandomized, (d) quantitative descriptive, and (e) mixed methods. CONCLUSION: The MMAT is a unique tool that can be used to appraise the quality of different study designs. Also, by limiting to core criteria, the MMAT can provide a more efficient appraisal.",
keywords = "critical appraisal tool, mixed methods review, mixed studies review, Quality, systematic review",
author = "Hong, {Quan Nha} and Sergi F{\`a}bregues and Gillian Bartlett and Felicity Boardman and Margaret Cargo and Pierre Dagenais and Gagnon, {Marie Pierre} and Frances Griffiths and Belinda Nicolau and Alicia O'Cathain and Rousseau, {Marie Claude} and Isabelle Vedel and Pierre Pluye",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3233/EFI-180221",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
pages = "285--291",
journal = "Education for Information",
issn = "0167-8329",
publisher = "IOS Press",
number = "4",

}

Hong, QN, Fàbregues, S, Bartlett, G, Boardman, F, Cargo, M, Dagenais, P, Gagnon, MP, Griffiths, F, Nicolau, B, O'Cathain, A, Rousseau, MC, Vedel, I & Pluye, P 2018, 'The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers', Education for Information, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 285-291. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-180221

The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. / Hong, Quan Nha; Fàbregues, Sergi; Bartlett, Gillian; Boardman, Felicity; Cargo, Margaret; Dagenais, Pierre; Gagnon, Marie Pierre; Griffiths, Frances; Nicolau, Belinda; O'Cathain, Alicia; Rousseau, Marie Claude; Vedel, Isabelle; Pluye, Pierre.

In: Education for Information, Vol. 34, No. 4, 01.01.2018, p. 285-291.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers

AU - Hong, Quan Nha

AU - Fàbregues, Sergi

AU - Bartlett, Gillian

AU - Boardman, Felicity

AU - Cargo, Margaret

AU - Dagenais, Pierre

AU - Gagnon, Marie Pierre

AU - Griffiths, Frances

AU - Nicolau, Belinda

AU - O'Cathain, Alicia

AU - Rousseau, Marie Claude

AU - Vedel, Isabelle

AU - Pluye, Pierre

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - INTRODUCTION: Appraising the quality of studies included in systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence is challenging. To address this challenge, a critical appraisal tool was developed: the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The aim of this paper is to present the enhancements made to the MMAT. DEVELOPMENT: The MMAT was initially developed in 2006 based on a literature review on systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence. It was subject to pilot and interrater reliability testing. A revised version of the MMAT was developed in 2018 based on the results from usefulness testing, a literature review on critical appraisal tools and a modified e-Delphi study with methodological experts to identify core criteria. TOOL DESCRIPTION: The MMAT assesses the quality of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies. It focuses on methodological criteria and includes five core quality criteria for each of the following five categories of study designs: (a) qualitative, (b) randomized controlled, (c) nonrandomized, (d) quantitative descriptive, and (e) mixed methods. CONCLUSION: The MMAT is a unique tool that can be used to appraise the quality of different study designs. Also, by limiting to core criteria, the MMAT can provide a more efficient appraisal.

AB - INTRODUCTION: Appraising the quality of studies included in systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence is challenging. To address this challenge, a critical appraisal tool was developed: the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The aim of this paper is to present the enhancements made to the MMAT. DEVELOPMENT: The MMAT was initially developed in 2006 based on a literature review on systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence. It was subject to pilot and interrater reliability testing. A revised version of the MMAT was developed in 2018 based on the results from usefulness testing, a literature review on critical appraisal tools and a modified e-Delphi study with methodological experts to identify core criteria. TOOL DESCRIPTION: The MMAT assesses the quality of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies. It focuses on methodological criteria and includes five core quality criteria for each of the following five categories of study designs: (a) qualitative, (b) randomized controlled, (c) nonrandomized, (d) quantitative descriptive, and (e) mixed methods. CONCLUSION: The MMAT is a unique tool that can be used to appraise the quality of different study designs. Also, by limiting to core criteria, the MMAT can provide a more efficient appraisal.

KW - critical appraisal tool

KW - mixed methods review

KW - mixed studies review

KW - Quality

KW - systematic review

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85059510533&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3233/EFI-180221

DO - 10.3233/EFI-180221

M3 - Article

VL - 34

SP - 285

EP - 291

JO - Education for Information

JF - Education for Information

SN - 0167-8329

IS - 4

ER -