Dear Editor-in-Chief
We have recently studied an article published in your journal entitled "Factors influencing medical services" carefully and with interest (1). Qualitative researches have different approaches, including "Phenomenology", "Grounded Theory" "," Ethnography "," Historical " and " Action Research "(2–4). Approval and acceptance of the basic principles of qualitative studies is the first step in conducting a qualitative research. All approaches of the qualitative researches have similar purpose and they all try to understand a particular phenomenon from the perspective of those who experience that phenomenon (4). A researcher needs to choose an approach giving a good response to his/her research question. Choosing the method of a qualitative research depends on the type of research question. Among the different approaches of qualitative studies, "Grounded Theory" may lead to develop a theory. Mosadegh Rad (1) has not mentioned in his study that which approach he has used. The author should be pointed out that according to which approach of qualitative studies he has raised his research question. In the article, the "content analysis" has been pointed out. A content analysis has three types, including "conventional", "directional" and "summative". However, the author has not specified which one has used in his study. In content analysis, "analysis unit, meaning unit, and condensation" are very important (5). However, the author has not mentioned anything about them. Besides, the author has not addressed "trustworthiness", which is important in the qualitative studies. Mosadegh Rad has ended his article with presenting a model. However, two questions arise: Can he present a model using a content analysis? Why had not the author used the "grounded theory" if he wanted to provide a model or a theory? (3, 6). It seems that the model provided has been derived from the literature and other articles and the author has considered it as a framework for his study. Therefore, there are paradoxes in the study method and its findings which confuse the readers.
Acknowledgements
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests.
References
- Mosadeghrad AM (2014). Factors affecting medical service quality. Iran J Public Health, 43(2):210–20. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Erlingsson C, Brysiewicz P (2013). Orientation among multiple truths: An introduction to qualitative research. Afr J Emerg Med, 3(2):92–9. [Google Scholar]
- Fletcher AJ, Marchildon GP (2014). Using the delphi method for qualitative, participatory action research in health leadership. Int J Qualitative Methods, 13(1):1–18. [Google Scholar]
- Moss H, Donnellan C, O’Neill D (2012). A review of qualitative methodologies used to explore patient perceptions of arts and healthcare. Med Humanit, 38(2):106–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Graneheim UH, Lundman B (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurs Educ Today, 24(2):105–12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Webster F, Perruccio AV, Jenkinson R, Jaglal S, Schemitsch E, Waddell JP, et al. (2013). Where is the patient in models of patient-centred care: A grounded theory study of total joint replacement patients. BMC Health Serv Res, 13(1):1–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]