the university of sydney sydney school of public health qualitative health research collaboration...
TRANSCRIPT
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
Qualitative Health Research Collaboration (QHeRC)
23rd Feb 2010
Sian Smith
Research Fellow, Screening and Test Evaluation Program
Sydney School of Public Health, USYD
Quality in qualitative health research
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
9.00 – 9.20 Background to session 9.20 – 9.40 Overview of five articles
9.40 – 10.20 Small group discussion
10.20 – 11.00 Report back
11.00 – 12.00 Morning tea & general discussion
Summary
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
Aims of this session To review how different researchers reflect on
and write about issues of quality in qualitative research;
To discuss the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches to assessing quality;
To share stories and experiences of applying criteria to appraise or improve the quality of research.
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
Article 1
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
Are researchers using qualitative research to its full potential?
Qualitative research can be too deductive. ‘One-shot’ interviews with little explanation. Interviews with health professionals – ‘getting
behind the facade.’ Ethnography- seeing what people do. Mixed methods research – comprehensive
picture of research enquiry. Value of qualitative synthesis- drawing existing
studies together and generating new ‘higher order’ concepts. Pope & Mays, 2009 BMJ; 339:737-739
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
Article 2
NSW Pub Health Bull 2009, 20 (7-8): 105-111
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
Basic principles for conducting qualitative enquiry:
Understand social world – complex, dynamic, ordinary. Theory is ubiquitous - building theory to explain social
phenomenon, and informed by theory in creating and reporting data.
Participants are ‘special’ and ‘uniquely positioned’, identify samples in a flexible and dynamic way.
Analysis means more than stating ‘X themes emerged’, thorough account of analytic methods.
Distinguish between methods (what you do) and methodology (why you do it), less written about methodology in articles.
More justification at each stage of research.Carter et al. NSW Pub Health Bull 2009, 20 (7-8): 105-111Carter et al. Qual Health Res 2007: 17 (10): 1316-28
What do we mean by good qualitative research?
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
Article 3
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
Appraising qualitative studies using quantitative criteria is not appropriate.
Within qualitative research, numerous approaches, paradigms, schools, which vary in ontological, epistemological and methodological positions.
Comprehensive framework for making decisions about quality. Two core principles: Transparency –clear and detailed information about
every step of the research process Systematicity –description of regular or standard
qualitative data collection and analysis methods
Establishing rigour in qualitative research
Meyrick 2006, J Hlth Psych 11 (5),799-808
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
Meyrick 2006, J Hlth Psych 11 (5),799-808
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
Article 4
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
Sensitivity to context Theoretical; previous empirical work; theory building
‘vertical generalisation’; social context; ethical and power (im)balance issues
Commitment and rigour Engagement in topic, methodological competence and
skill, thorough data collection and analysis Transparency and coherence
Disclosure of research process (data collection, analysis), fit between theory and method, reflexivity (motivations, constraints)
Impact and importance Theoretical, socio-cultural, practical
Features of good qualitative research
Yardley, L. Psychology & Health 2000; 15: 215-228
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
Article 5
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
Kitto et al. MJA 2008; 188: 243-246
MJA guidelines for enhancing rigour in qualitative research
When writing for MJA recommend that authors focus on a few aspects of findings and use visual displays strategically.
Suggest word limit for each section
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
Patterns across articles
Concepts of quality used to assess qualitative research should be quite different from those used to assess quantitative research
Move away from ‘checklists’ to frameworks and guidelines
Propose criteria that can be applied to all qualitative research – a ‘pluralistic approach’
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health
Questions for discussion How necessary are defined criteria for quality of qualitative
research? Can one set of criteria work for all qualitative research? Which of the options do you prefer? Why? Are there any that you violently disagree with? What is thematic analysis exactly? Is thematic analysis enough? Is it too deductive? How feasible is the MJA format and word limit? Do word limits affect the quality of qualitative research? What journals have you found to be sympathetic to
qualitative health research?
The University of Sydney
Sydney School of Public Health