| Topic | Item no | Guide questions/description | Location |
|---|---|---|---|
| Domain 1: Research team and reflexivity | |||
| Personal characteristics | |||
| Interviewer/facilitator | 1 | Which author/s conducted the interview or focus groups | Method |
| Credentials | 2 | What were the researcher’s credentials? E.g., PhD, MD | Method |
| Occupation | 3 | What was their occupation at the time of the study? | Method |
| Gender | 4 | Was the researcher male or female? | Method |
| Experience and training | 5 | What experience or training did the researcher have? | Method |
| Relationship with participants | |||
| Relationship established | 6 | Was relationship established prior to study commencement? | Method |
| Participant knowledge of the interviewer | 7 | What did the participants know about the researcher? E.g., personal goals, reasons for doing the research | Method |
| Interview characteristics | 8 | What characteristics were reported about the interviewer/facilitator? E.g., bias, assumptions, reasons and interests in the research topic | Method |
| Domain 2: Study design | |||
| Theoretical framework | |||
| Methodological orientation and Theory | 9 | What methodological orientation was stated to underpin the study? E.g., grounded theory, discourse analysis, ethnography, phenomenology, content analysis | Method |
| Participant selection | |||
| Sampling | 10 | How were participants selected? E.g., purposive, convenience, consecutive, snowball | Method |
| Method of approach | 11 | How were participants approached? E.g., face-to-face, telephone, mail, email | Method |
| Sample size | 12 | How many participants were in the study? | Method |
| Non-participation | 13 | How many people refused to participate or dropped out? Reasons? | Method |
| Setting | |||
| Setting of data collection | 14 | Where was the data collected? E.g., Home, clinic, workplace | Method |
| Presence of non-participants | 15 | Was anyone else present besides the participants and researchers? | Method |
| Description of sample | 16 | What are the important characteristics of the sample? E.g., demographic data | Method |
| Data collection | |||
| Interview guide | 17 | Were questions, prompts, guides provided by the authors? Was it pilot tested? | Method and Appendix C |
| Repeat interviews | 18 | Were repeat interviews carried out? If yes, how many? | N/A |
| Audio/visual recording | 19 | Did the researcher use audio or video recording to collect the data? | Method |
| Field notes | 20 | Were field notes made during and/or after the interview or focus group? | Method |
| Duration | 21 | What was the duration of the interviews or focus group? | Method |
| Data saturation | 22 | Was data saturation discussed? |
N/A The concept of data saturation is incompatible with a reflexive thematic analysis approach as adopted in this paper (see Braun & Clarke, 2019) |
| Transcripts returned | 23 | Were transcripts returned to participants to comment and/or correction? | Method |
| Domain 3: Analysis and findings | |||
| Data analysis | |||
| Number of data coders | 24 | How many data coders coded the data? | Method |
| Description of the coding tree | 25 | Did authors provide a description of the coding tree? | Results |
| Derivation of themes | 26 | Were themes identified in advance or derived from the data? | Method |
| Software | 27 | What software, if applicable, was used to manage the data? | Method |
| Participant checking | 28 | Did participants provide feedback on the findings? | Method |
| Reporting | |||
| Quotations presented | 29 | Were participant quotations presented to illustrate the themes/findings? Was each quotation identified? E.g., participant number | Results |
| Data and findings consistent | 30 | Was there consistency between the data presented and the findings? | Results |
| Clarity of major themes | 31 | Were major themes clearly presented in the findings? | Results |
| Clarity of minor themes | 32 | Is there a description of diverse cases or discussion of minor themes |
Results No distinction made specifically of minor themes, but examples of diverse views embedded within the consideration of each theme, reflecting real-world complexity |