Skip to main content

Table 3 Quality of evidence within and across cases

From: How and why do win–win strategies work in engaging policy-makers to implement Health in All Policies? A multiple-case study of six state- and national-level governments

TriangulationEvidence that is supported by multiple sources (i.e. literature and interviews); assessed at single case stage of analysisa
StrongThick evidence from three or more sources of data (e.g. literature or different types of informants)
AdequateThick evidence from two sources of data (e.g. literature or different types of informants)
LimitedThick evidence from only one source of data (i.e. literature or type of informant)
Thin evidence onlyOnly thin evidence available
No evidenceNo evidence was generated
Strength of Evidence Across CasesThe degree of support for the hypotheses within either the literal or contrast replication for a given hypothesis across cases; assessed at cross-case stage of analysis
HighSupport is high when triangulation is at least adequate across 60% or more of cases
MediumSupport is medium when triangulation is at least adequate across 40% of cases
LowSupport is low when there is less than 40% adequacy
Thin evidence onlyOnly thin evidence available
No supportNo thick or thin evidence was found (i.e. the hypothesis was not discussed by key informants or in the literature)
  1. a Different types of key informants (e.g. civil servants in different sectors, such as health and transportation, politicians, activists/advocates, academics) can be considered a unique type of data/‘source’