Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Nov 25.
Published in final edited form as: J Vasc Access. 2020 Oct 29;22(6):911–919. doi: 10.1177/1129729820968400

Table 2.

Ensuring research integrity and rigor*.

Issue addressed Action taken
Informed consent Interviewer (KW) reviewed informed consent form and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) authorizations with potential study participants immediately prior to each interview
Separation of research and clinical care
  1. Interviewer (KW) assured participants that:
    • no interview data would be shared with their clinical care team
    • nothing said in the interview would affect the patient’s clinical care
  2. Interviewer did not participate in any of study participants’ clinical care

  3. Instead of professional clinical attire, the interviewer wore street clothes and an identification badge during the interview

Transferability/ External validity
  1. All interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim.

  2. Each transcription was reviewed for accuracy against the corresponding recording by an investigator.

Protecting patient privacy Proper names were replaced with pseudonyms
Reliability Both investigators analyzed transcriptions independently and assigned initial codes
Credibility Investigators met regularly to review the analytic codes and resolve discrepancies through discussion
Derivation of themes Constant comparison was used to examine data within the same interview and across interviews
Confirmability Audit trail included field notes and memos:
  • Interviewer recorded field notes before and after each interview15

  • Interviewer recorded Initial memos after each interview reflecting on analytic thoughts, comparisons, connections, hunches, and speculations of the interviewer5

  • Analytical memo was written after initial coding for each interview

  • Ad-hoc memos were written whenever a significant theme was identified

Objectivity Field notes and memos emphasized self-reflexivity (the process in which the researcher critically examines how their own values, attitudes, and biases may influence their experience, conduct and interpretation of the interview)
*

The presentation of results meets the standards of the COREQ Checklist for Reporting Qualitative Studies.16