Table 1.

Critical meta-narrative synthesis: from quantitative data to narratives

Systematic profiles*			Critical questions
Technique	Focus	Example
Modal profile	The most frequently occurring attributes	When asked to state the preference for route of administration: 86% (69/80) patients were comfortable with an oral form (pills, drops or added to food), while 15% (12/80) chose smoking. This was qualitised as: Most patients stated preference for oral formulations, while a minority preferred inhaled products.	What is this study trying to say about patients’ values? Are patients’ values and preferences explicitly identified? If so, what are they? How do participants’ answers to the questions provide insight into patients’ values and preferences, and their influence on the choice of treatment for chronic pain? How different (or similar) are patients’ and carers’ perspectives on medical cannabis for chronic pain? Are there other individual or contextual factors (eg, age, gender, socioeconomic status) that influence patients’ values and preferences towards medical cannabis for chronic pain?
Average profile	Average of the particular variables	Patients’ concerns regarding medical cannabis using a 10-point scale (0=not concerned, 10=extremely concerned) were, in order of important: side effects (mean=7.0±2.9), addiction (6.6±3.2), tolerance (6.2±3.2), losing control or acting strangely (6.2±3.3), and what family and friends may think (3.9±3.8). This was qualitised as: Patients were generally most concerned about the side effects of medical cannabis, followed by addiction, tolerance, losing control or acting strangely, and what family and friends may think.
Comparative profile	A comparison of key outcomes	Patients were asked to rate their values and concerns regarding use of cannabis (strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree and don't know). Significantly more males, versus women, were concerned about cannabis being addictive (p=0.031), leading to the use of more harmful substances (p=0.036), and causing an inability to think clearly (p=0.008). This was qualitised as: Compared with females, significantly more males were concerned about cannabis being addictive, leading to the use of more harmful substances, and causing an inability to think clearly.
Holistic profile	A combination of the modal, average and comparative profiles	Patients were asked to rate their willingness to use medical cannabis on a 0–10 point scale (0=extreme unwillingness to 10=extreme willingness). Greater unwillingness was associated with higher age (bivariate correlation coefficient(r)=0.40; p=0.001), but not with pain intensity or duration, or sex. This was qualitised as: Higher age was related to more unwillingness to use medical cannabis.

*We used the following criteria when ‘qualitising’ quantitative into qualitative data: Very few’: reported by 10% or less of patients (if the sample was >100). ‘Most common’ and ‘least common’ were used when factors were reported in groups, to denote the factors that patients agreed with the most versus the least. The criteria above did not apply in these cases (eg, ‘Recommendations from a medical professional was the least influential factor among patients when selecting cannabis.’). All or almost all’: Reported by over 90% of patients; ‘Most’: Reported by 75%–90% of patients; ‘Majority’: Reported by 50%–75% of patients; ‘Minority’: Reported by 25%–50% of patients; ‘Some’: Reported by10%−25% of patients; ‘None or almost none’: Reported by 10% or less of patients (if the sample was 100 or less).