Table 1.
CASP Questions and Quality Appraisal Results (N = 55)
| CASP Questions • CASP Subquestions |
Results |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | Can’t tell | ||||
| N | % | N | % | N | % | |
| Was the research design appropriate to address the aims of the research? | ||||||
| • Did the researcher justify the research design? | 26 | 47.3 | 28 | 50.9 | 1 | 1.8 |
| Was the recruitment strategy appropriate to the aims of the research? | ||||||
| • Did the researcher explain how the participants were selected? | 44 | 80 | 6 | 10.9 | 5 | 9.1 |
| Was the data collected in a way that addressed the research issue? | ||||||
| • Was the setting for data collection justified? | 31 | 56.4 | 21 | 38.2 | 3 | 5.4 |
| • Was it clear how data were collected e.g., focus group, semistructured interview etc.? | 55 | 100 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 |
| • Did the researcher justify the methods chosen? | 13 | 23.6 | 41 | 74.5 | 1 | 1.8 |
| • Did the researcher make the methods explicit e.g., for the interview method, was there an indication of how interviews were conducted, or did they use a topic guide? | 51 | 92.7 | 4 | 7.3 | 0 | 0.0 |
| • Was the form of data clear e.g., tape recordings, video materials, notes, etc.? | 54 | 98.2 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 1.8 |
| • Did the researcher discuss saturation of data? | 20 | 36.4 | 35 | 63.6 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Has the relationship between researcher and participants been adequately considered? | ||||||
| • Did the researcher critically examine their own role, potential bias, and influence during data collection, including sample recruitment and choice of location | 4 | 7.3 | 50 | 90.9 | 1 | 1.8 |
| Have ethical issues been taken into consideration? | ||||||
| • Was there sufficient detail about how the research was explained to participants for the reader to assess whether ethical standards were maintained? | 49 | 89.1 | 4 | 7.3 | 2 | 3.6 |
| • Was approval sought from an ethics committee? | 51 | 92.7 | 4 | 7.3 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Was the data analysis sufficiently rigorous? | ||||||
| • Was there an in-depth description of the analysis process? | 46 | 83.6 | 9 | 16.4 | 0 | 0.0 |
| • Was thematic or content analysis used. If so, was it clear how the categories/themes derived from the data? | 51 | 92.7 | 3 | 5.5 | 1 | 1.8 |
| • Did the researcher critically examine their own role, potential bias and influence during analysis and selection of data for presentation? | 20 | 36.4 | 30 | 54.5 | 5 | 9.1 |
| Was there a clear statement of findings? | ||||||
| • Were the findings explicit? | 55 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| • Did the researcher discuss the credibility of their findings (e.g., triangulation) | 46 | 83.6 | 8 | 14.5 | 1 | 1.8 |
| • Were the findings discussed in relation to the original research question? | 55 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Note. The CASP questions are adapted from “10 questions to help you make sense of qualitative research,” by Critical Appraisal Skills Programme, 2013, retrieved from http://media.wix.com/ugd/dded87_29c5b002d99342f788c6ac670e49f274.pdf. Its license can be found at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/