Using qualitative comparative analysis in a systematic review of a complex intervention

Table 2 Summary of findings from analysis 1 evaluating combinations of behavior change techniques used by effective adherence interventions

Combinations of behavior change techniques		Consistency^b (%)	Coverage Number of cases (raw^c (%)/unique^d (%))
Combination 1	Increasing knowledge AND enhancing self-efficacy	100	17 cases (50/44)
Combination 2	Using motivational interviewing AND not using facilitation	100	4 cases (12/6)
Combination 3	Enhancing self-efficacy AND using intention formation AND improving attitudes AND not increasing awareness	100	2 cases (6/0)
Combination 4	Using action control AND not increasing knowledge AND not using facilitation AND not using maintenance strategies	100	1 case (3/3)
Combination 5	Enhancing self-efficacy AND using intention formation AND improving attitudes AND not using facilitation AND not using maintenance strategies	100	2 cases (6/0)
Combination 6	Increasing knowledge AND using facilitation AND increasing awareness AND using intention formation AND using action control AND not using maintenance strategies	100	2 cases (6/6)
Combination 7	Increasing knowledge AND using facilitation AND improving attitude AND not increasing awareness	100	3 cases (9/9)
Solution^a (%)	–	100	76

^aThe solution is the conjunction of all combinations identified; solution coverage refers to the number of studies that include at least one of the identified combinations of behavioral change techniques. The solution coverage for intermediate solution was 76 %, which means 26 of the 34 studies were represented by one or more of the identified combinations, leaving 8 effective studies unexplained
^bConsistency refers to the proportion of studies covered by sufficient combinations of behavioral change techniques that demonstrated improved adherence
^cRaw coverage is the number of studies with the configuration of conditions (N varies by configuration) divided by the number of studies demonstrating improved medication adherence (N = 34). Studies may be covered by more than one configuration because of the logical minimization that occurs to generate more parsimonious combinations of conditions and condition complements. Raw coverage can vary between 0 and 100 %, with higher coverage representing more empirical relevance
^dUnique coverage is the number of studies that are only covered by the configuration (N varies by configuration) divided by the number of studies demonstrating improved adherence (N = 34)

ISSN: 2046-4053