Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) is a means of analysing the causal contribution of different conditions (e.g. aspects of an intervention and the wider context) to an outcome of interest. QCA starts with the documentation of the different configurations of conditions associated with each case of an observed outcome.
In order to conduct QCA analysis, there must be different levels of success observed across the cases being compared. Some cases must have a positive outcome, while others have a negative outcome, so that the factors leading to success or “failure” can be compared and identified. In addition, QCA as be used to test multiple outcomes, one by one. 5.
QCA is an approach developed by Charles Ragin [ 14, 15 ], originating in comparative politics and macrosociology to address questions of comparative historical development. Using set theory, QCA methods explore the relationships between ‘conditions’ and ‘outcomes’ by identifying configurations of necessary and sufficient conditions for an outcome.
In the process of configurational comparative analysis, the researcher engages in a dialogue between cases and relevant theories. Indeed, the choice of the variables (conditions and outcome) for the analysis must be theoretically informed.
A systematic review has the potential advantages of transparency and rigour and, if not exhaustive, our search is likely to be representative of the body of research using QCA for evaluative public health research up to 2020. However, a limitation is the inevitable difficulty in operationalising a ‘public health’ intervention. Exclusions on scope a
This systematic review has reviewed studies that deployed an emergent methodology, which has no reporting guidelines and has had, to date, a relatively low level of awareness among many potential evidence users in public health. For this reason, many of the studies reviewed were relatively detailed on the methods used, and the rationale for utilisi
In reviewing methods for evaluating natural experiments, Craig et al. focus on statistical techniques for enhancing causal inference, noting only that what they call ‘qualitative’ techniques (the cited references for these are all QCA studies) require “further studies … to establish their validity and usefulness” [2]. The studies included in this r