Abstract
Qualitative research can make a valuable contribution to the study of quality and safety in health care. Sound ways of appraising qualitative research are needed, but currently there are many different proposals with few signs of an emerging consensus. One problem has been the tendency to treat qualitative research as a unified field. We distinguish universal features of quality from those specific to methodology and offer a set of minimally prescriptive prompts to assist with the assessment of generic features of qualitative research. In using these, account will need to be taken of the particular method of data collection and methodological approach being used. There may be a need for appraisal criteria suited to the different methods of qualitative data collection and to different methodological approaches. These more specific criteria would help to distinguish fatal flaws from more minor errors in the design, conduct, and reporting of qualitative research. There will be difficulties in doing this because some aspects of qualitative research, particularly those relating to quality of insight and interpretation, will remain difficult to appraise and will rely largely on subjective judgement.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (54.1 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Barbour R. S. Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? BMJ. 2001 May 5;322(7294):1115–1117. doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bradley E. H., Holmboe E. S., Mattera J. A., Roumanis S. A., Radford M. J., Krumholz H. M. Data feedback efforts in quality improvement: lessons learned from US hospitals. Qual Saf Health Care. 2004 Feb;13(1):26–31. doi: 10.1136/qhc.13.1.26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Campbell Rona, Pound Pandora, Pope Catherine, Britten Nicky, Pill Roisin, Morgan Myfanwy, Donovan Jenny. Evaluating meta-ethnography: a synthesis of qualitative research on lay experiences of diabetes and diabetes care. Soc Sci Med. 2003 Feb;56(4):671–684. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00064-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Chapple A., Rogers A. Explicit guidelines for qualitative research: a step in the right direction, a defence of the 'soft' option, or a form of sociological imperialism? Fam Pract. 1998 Dec;15(6):556–561. doi: 10.1093/fampra/15.6.556. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dixon-Woods M., Fitzpatrick R. Qualitative research in systematic reviews. Has established a place for itself. BMJ. 2001 Oct 6;323(7316):765–766. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7316.765. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Henwood K. L., Pidgeon N. F. Qualitative research and psychological theorizing. Br J Psychol. 1992 Feb;83(Pt 1):97–111. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1992.tb02426.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Popay J., Rogers A., Williams G. Rationale and standards for the systematic review of qualitative literature in health services research. Qual Health Res. 1998 May;8(3):341–351. doi: 10.1177/104973239800800305. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pope C., van Royen P., Baker R. Qualitative methods in research on healthcare quality. Qual Saf Health Care. 2002 Jun;11(2):148–152. doi: 10.1136/qhc.11.2.148. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Taxis K., Barber N. Causes of intravenous medication errors: an ethnographic study. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003 Oct;12(5):343–347. doi: 10.1136/qhc.12.5.343. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]