A hierarchy of evidence for assessing qualitative health research

2006

Qualitative methods have much to offer those studying health care and health services. However, because these methods have traditionally been employed in the social sciences, they may be unfamiliar to health care professionals and researchers with a biomedical or natural science background. Indeed, qualitative methods may seem alien alongside the experimental and observational quantitative methods used in clinical, biological and epidemiological research.

Online Journal of …, 2010

Qualitative research is type of formative research that includes specialized techniques for obtaining in-depth responses about what people think and how they feel. It is seen as the research that seeks answer to the questions in the real world. Qualitative researchers gather what they see, hear, read from people and places, from events and activities, with the purpose to learn about the community and to generate new understanding that can be used by the social world. Qualitative research have often been conducted to answer the question "why" rather than "what". A purpose of qualitative research is the construction of new understanding. Here, we present an overview of application of qualitative methods in health research. We have discussed here the different types of qualitative methods and how we and others have used them in different settings/scenarios; sample size and sampling techniques; analysis of qualitative data; validity in qualitative research; and ethical issues.

Choice Reviews Online, 2009

Qualitative methods have much to offer those studying health care and health services. However, because these methods have traditionally been employed in the social sciences, they may be unfamiliar to health care professionals and researchers with a biomedical or natural science background. Indeed, qualitative methods may seem alien alongside the experimental and observational quantitative methods used in clinical, biological and epidemiological research. Misunderstandings about the nature of qualitative methods and their uses have caused qualitative research to be labelled 'unscientific', difficult to replicate or as little more than anecdote, personal impression or conjecture. The first edition of this book, and the series of papers in the British Medical Journal on which the book was initially based, deliberately set out to counter this view. The growing interest in qualitative methods in health research, and their increasing acceptance in clinical and biomedical arenas, in the 10 years since the book was first published, suggest that such misunderstandings may be diminishing. The purpose of this book has therefore altered subtly. Its main aim continues to be to introduce the main qualitative methods available for the study of health and health care, and to show how qualitative research can be employed appropriately and fruitfully to answer some of the increasingly complex questions confronting researchers. In addition, the book considers the ethics of qualitative research and how to assess its quality and looks at the application of qualitative methods within different styles of research and in the emerging area of research synthesis.

Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 2021

Qualitative Health research procedures that are not always applied, mainly in the analysis phase. Our objective is to present a systematized technique of step-by-step procedures for qualitative content analysis in the health field: Clinical-Qualitative Content Analysis. Our proposal consider that the qualitative research applied to the field of health, can acquire a perspective analogous to clinical practice and aims to interpret meanings expressed in reports through individual interviews or statements. This analysis takes part of the Clinical-Qualitative Method. The literature review was realized through: a book chapter, eight original articles and three methodological articles. The Clinical-qualitative Content Analysis technique comprises seven steps: 1) Editing material for analysis; 2) Floating reading; 3) Construction of the units of analysis; 4) Construction of codes of meaning; 5) General refining of the codes and the Construction of categories; 6) Discussion; 7) Validity. Th...

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 2007

Objective: To provide an overview of qualitative methodologies for health researchers in order to inform better research practices.Approach: Different possible goals in health research are outlined: quantifying relationships between variables, identifying associations, exploring experience, understanding process, distinguishing representations, comprehending social practices and achieving change. Three important issues in understanding qualitative approaches to research are discussed: the partiality of our view of the world, deductive and inductive approaches to research, and the role of the researcher in the research process. The methodologies of phenomenology, grounded theory, discourse analysis, ethnography, ethnomethodology and action research are illustrated.Conclusion: In order to undertake high-quality qualitative research, it is important for researchers to consider their analytic focus and methodological position.

Medical Care Research and Review, 2011

Over the past 10 years, the field of health services and management research has seen renewed interest in the use of qualitative research methods. This article examines the volume and characteristics of qualitative research articles published in nine major health services and management journals between 1998 and 2008. Qualitative research articles comprise 9% of research articles published in these journals. Although the publication rate of qualitative research articles has not kept pace with that of quantitative research articles, citation analysis suggests that qualitative research articles contribute comparably to the field's knowledge base. A wide range of policy and management topics has been examined using qualitative methods. Case study designs, interviews, and documentary sources were the most frequently used methods. Half of qualitative research articles provided little or no detail about key aspects the study's methods. Implications are discussed and recommendations are offered for promoting the publication of qualitative research.

Health Services Research, 1999

Objective. To lay the foundation for an explicit review and dialogue concerning the criteria that should be used to evaluate qualitative health services research. Clear criteria are critical for the discipline because they provide a benchmark against which research can be assessed. Data Sources Existing literature in the social sciences and health services research, particularly in primary care and medicine. Principal Finding Traditional criteria for evaluating qualitative research are rooted in the philosophical perspective (positivism) most closely associated with quantitative research and methods. As a result, qualitative research and methods may not be used as frequently as they can be and research results generated from qualitative studies may not be disseminated as widely as possible. However, alternative criteria for evaluating qualitative research have been proposed that reflect a different philosophical perspec- tive (post-positivism). Moreover, these criteria are tailored to the unique purposes for which qualitative research is used and the research designs traditionally employed. While criteria based on these two different philosophical perspectives have much in common, some important differences exist. Condlusion. The field of health services research must engage in a collective, "qualitative" process to determine which criteria to adopt (positivist or post-positivist), or whether some combination of the two is most appropriate. Greater clarity about the criteria used to evaluate qualitative research will strengthen the discipline by fostering a more appropriate and improved use of qualitative methods, a greater willingness to fund and publish "good" qualitative research, and the development ofmore informed consumers of qualitative research results.

Research in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP, 2016

Qualitative approaches represent an important contributor to health care research. However, several researchers argue that contemporary qualitative research does not live up to its full potential. By presenting a snapshot of contemporary qualitative research in the field of social and administrative pharmacy, this study challenges contributors to the field by asking: Are we ready to accept the challenge and take qualitative research one step further? The purpose of this study was to initiate a constructive dialogue on the need for increased transparency in qualitative data analysis, including explicitly reflecting upon theoretical perspectives affecting the research process. Content analysis was used to evaluate levels of theoretical visibility and analysis transparency in selected qualitative research articles published in Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy between January 2014 and January 2015. In 14 out of 21 assessed papers, the use of theory was found to be Seemingl...

Journal of General Internal Medicine, 1998

Finding and Evaluating EvidenceSystematic Reviews and Evidence-Based Practice, 2011

Systematic reviews have become an important component of evidence-based health care. To date, these reviews have focused predominantly on randomized controlled trials to determine the effectiveness of treatments. However, there is a growing interest in reviews of qualitative research to summarize research addressing a phenomenon of interest or to supplement evidence generated by randomized controlled trials. These reviews have the potential to make an important contribution because they can bring the person s perspective in to the decision making process. Like all systematic reviews, optimal methods for reviewing qualitative research are still evolving, however published reviews demonstrate considerable variability in their approach. Despite their potential usefulness there has been little professional discussion and debate. This paper presents the current methods used for the review of qualitative studies and highlights some areas in need of further exploration.

Qualitative Health Research, 2006

As qualitative researchers, we have not explored our own work from the qualitative evidence perspective. The author suggests that qualitative researchers need to explore the conflicting agendas of evidence-based medicine and qualitative inquiry, compare the anatomy of qualitative data and evidenced-based data, and explore the autonomy of qualitative inquiry within the context of evidenced-based medicine. By attending to and communicating the differences in qualitative and quantitative evidence, and by accepting the differences in our research agendas, qualitative researchers will achieve the legitimacy that they deserve and which they require.

In this article, we explore the form of evaluation put forward by guidelines used in the health sciences for appraising qualitative research and we begin to articulate an alternative posture. Most guidelines are derivative of the modes of assessment developed by clinical epidemiologists as part of the promotion of evidence-based medicine (EBM). They are predominantly proceduralist in orientation, equating quality with the proper execution of research techniques. We argue that this form of judgment assumes a fixed relationship between research practice and knowledge generated, and tends to over-simplify and standardize the complex and non-formulaic nature of qualitative inquiry. A concern with methods as objects of judgment in and of themselves restricts the reader's field of vision to the research process and diverts attention away from the analytic content of the research. We propose an alternative 'substantive' perspective that focuses on the analysis put forward, and regards methods as resources for engaging with and understanding the substantive findings and topic of inquiry. An important challenge is to find a way to embody such a form of judgment in practical assessment tools.

Ciênc. saúde coletiva , 2021

The lack of knowledge in the biomedical literature regarding the validity of qualitative studies might be related to the lower number of qualitative studies that have been published. The criticisms range from a lack of theoretical depth to the superficial discussions of empirical findings. The aim of this study was to explore the bibliometric entities and the trends in the structure of qualitative research in the biomedical literature. A bibliometric analysis and mapping of the biomedical literature were used. The number of studies selected was 1,725. The heath themes with the most publications included Health Management (12%) and Women’s Health (9.8%), while the authors of the studies had academic affiliation in 76 different countries. The sample sizes were between 11 and 20 participants (27.13%) and the Grounded Theory framework (9.04%) stood out. The improved structuring of a qualitative research extends the effective communication between health providers and researchers, and support in the management of clinical situations