“What the Meta Is Going on?” A Scoping Review of the Different Methods and Methodology of Qualitative Synthesis

Background: There is a proliferation of terms that are used to define and describe qualitative methods of review synthesis. These terms can make understanding which approach to use difficult and the ability to generate operational clarity challenging. Further research is required that exams and maps the terms and approaches to synthesis. Objective: This scoping review aims to map the landscape of qualitative synthesis methods, evaluate the ability to operationalise named methods, and explore their philosophical foundations and methodological associations. Methods: Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines a scoping review was undertaken. A comprehensive search was conducted across multiple databases and grey literature sources. Articles were included that examined a methodological approach to qualitative synthesis. Data extraction and charting focused on synthesis type, frameworks, philosophical alignment, and operational guidance. Results: Fifty-four articles were identified and within these 14 qualitative methodologies were identified and 5 types of aggregative methods and 10 types of interpretive methods of synthesis. Meta-ethnography, meta-synthesis, framework synthesis were the most frequently cited methodologies. A subset of these methodologies and methods were found to be the more operationalizable and these are discussed. Conclusion: The review highlights significant terminological and methodological fragmentation in qualitative synthesis. It underscores the need for clearer guidance, standardised terminology, and stronger links between synthesis methodologies, methods and philosophical traditions. A decision tree is proposed to support researchers in selecting appropriate synthesis methodologies.