“What the Meta Is Going on?” A Scoping Review of the Different Approaches to 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-one articles were identified and within these twenty-eight distinct syntheses approaches were identified. Meta-ethnography, meta-synthesis, grounded theory synthesis, and thematic synthesis being the most frequently cited. The ten most frequently identified approaches for synthesis are examined. A subset of these approaches were found to be the most operationalizable, including meta-ethnography, meta-narrative, and aggregative synthesis. 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 methods and philosophical traditions. A decision tree and operationalisation matrix are proposed to support researchers in selecting appropriate synthesis approaches.