Skip to main content

Table 4 Quality assessment – Qualitative tool – Those who remain behind

From: Transnational social networks, health, and care: a systematic narrative literature review

Reference

Number

Study (n = 8)

Clear, explicit and appropriate aim

Clearly described context

Researcher reflexivity demonstrated

Source and volume of data appropriate to objectives

Data generation tools well described and appropriate

Analysis approach well described and appropriate

Consideration of limitations and trustworthiness evident

Claims/ findings adequately supported by data

Key concepts relating to migration/ ethnicity are explicit

Summary assessment

[35]

Amin and Ingman, 2014

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

–

***

[36]

Chinouya, 2006

+

+

–

+

+

+

–

–

–

**

[8]

Levitt and Lamba-Nieves, 2011

+

+

–

+

–

–

–

+

+

**

[37]

Mekonnen and Lohnert, 2018

+

+

–

–

–

–

–

–

+

*

[38]

Patzer, 2018

+

+

–

–

+

–

–

+

+

**

[39]

Rubyan-Ling, 2019

+

+

–

–

+

+

–

–

+

**

[5]

Sobiech, 2019

+

+

–

–

+

+

+

+

+

***

[40]

Sriram, George, Baru and Bennett, 2018

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

–

***

  1. Assessment: + (sufficient) and – (insufficient)
  2. Summary assessment: *Low (< 4 components assessed as sufficient), **Moderate (4–6 components assessed as sufficient), and ***Good (7–9 components assessed as sufficient)