7/08/2018

1

Committee for Research

STEPHEN PARKER1,2,3

WORKING TOWARDS QUALITY IN

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

1 RANZCP Committee for Research2 Metro South Addiction and Mental Health Service, Brisbane, Australia3 University of Queensland School of Medicine, Brisbane, Australia

7/08/2018

2

COMMON CRITICISMS OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

OFTEN REFLECT A LACK OF FAMILIARITY WITH THESE

METHODS

Kvale S. Ten standard

Objections to Qualitative

Research Interviews.

Journal of

Phenomenological

Psychology.

1994;25(2):147-73.

7/08/2018

3

Razafsha M, Behforuzi H, Azari H,

Zhang Z, Wang KK, Kobeissy FH, et al.

Qualitative versus quantitative

methods in psychiatric research.

Methods Mol Biol. 2012;829:49-62.

A BRIEF AND INADEQUATE ORIENTATION TO QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

7/08/2018

4

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH IS RELEVANT TO MANY

CHALLENGES ASSOCIATED WITH MENTAL HEALTH

RESEARCH AND PRACTICE

7/08/2018

5

Craig P, Dieppe P,

Macintyre S, Michie S,

Nazareth I, Petticrew M.

Developing and evaluating

complex interventions: the

new Medical Research

Council guidance.

MEDICAL RESEARCH COUNCIL:

EVALUATION OF COMPLEX INTERVENTIONS

7/08/2018

6

CONCEPTS UNDERLYING TRUSTWORTHINESS

OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Qualitative criteria Related terms Key question Quantitative counterpart

Credibility (15, 23, 26) Validity (3, 11)

Authenticity (23, 26)

Internal validity (26)

Do the findings make sense and are they credible both

the subjects and readers?

Internal validity (15, 23)

Dependability (15, 23, 26) Reliability (3, 26)

Coherence (23)

Auditability (26)

Has reasonable care been taken to ensure consistency

over time, personnel, and methods?

Reliability (15, 23)

Reflexivity (11, 15) Honesty & openness (23)

Confirmability (23, 26)

Objectivity (26)

Is the analysis relatively free of unacknowledged

biases?

Objectivity (15)

Transferability (15, 23, 26) Application (26)

Action orientation (26)

External validity (26)

Fittingness (26)

Generalizability (3, 27)

Relevance (11, 28)

Utilization (26)

Are the findings of relevance outside of the immediate

context; are they useful?

External validity (15, 23)

7/08/2018

7

PRACTICAL SUGGESTIONS TO IMPROVE THE

TRUSTWORTHINESS OF YOUR QUALITATIVE PROJECT

7/08/2018

8

ADVICE TO TRAINEES CONTEMPLATING QUALITATIVE

METHODS FOR SCHOLARLY PROJECT

• Is the enthusiasm of the potential supervisor matched by their track record in completing similar projects?

• Do not take a qualitative project on because you think it will be easier or less time consuming

• Do not take on a qualitative project because you are frightened of statistics

• Is this an established project that you are joining or a new project you are expected to lead?

• Is the proposed project likely to yield findings that are relevant and valuable?

7/08/2018

9

1. Daly J, Willis K, Small R, Green J, Welch N, Kealy M, et al. A hierarchy of evidence for assessing qualitative health research. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):43-9.

2. Crabb S, Chur-Hansen A. Qualitative research: why psychiatrists are well-placed to contribute to the literature. Australasian psychiatry : bulletin of Royal Australian and New

Zealand College of Psychiatrists. 2009;17(5):398-401.

3. Collingridge DS, Gantt EE. The quality of qualitative research. Am J Med Qual. 2008;23(5):389-95.

4. Gewurtz R, Poole JM, Gruhl KR. Qualitative Research in Mental Health and Mental Illness. Handbook of Qualitative Health Research for Evidence-Based Practice, Handbooks in

Health, Work, and Disability 42016.

5. Kisely S, Kendall E. Critically appraising qualitative research: a guide for clinicians more familiar with quantitative techniques. Australasian psychiatry : bulletin of Royal

Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists. 2011;19(4):364-7.

6. Greenhalgh T, Annandale E, Ashcroft R, Barlow J, Black N, Bleakley A, et al. An open letter to The BMJ editors on qualitative research. BMJ. 2016;352:i563.

7. Loder E, Groves T, Schroter S, Merino JG, Weber W, Godlee F. The BMJ editors respond. BMJ. 2016;352:i1492.

8. Bolland MJ, Avenell A, Grey A. Qualitative research, observational research, and The BMJ. BMJ. 2016;352:i1483.

9. Goering P, Boydell KM, Pignatiello A. The relevance of qualitative research for clinical programs in psychiatry. Canadian journal of psychiatry Revue canadienne de psychiatrie.

2008;53(3):145-51.

10.Kvale S. Ten standard Objections to Qualitative Research Interviews. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology. 1994;25(2):147-73.

11.Malterud K. Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet. 2001;358(9280):483-8.

12.Grypdonck MH. Qualitative health research in the era of evidence-based practice. Qualitative health research. 2006;16(10):1371-85.

13.Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2015;350:h1258.

14.Razafsha M, Behforuzi H, Azari H, Zhang Z, Wang KK, Kobeissy FH, et al. Qualitative versus quantitative methods in psychiatric research. Methods Mol Biol. 2012;829:49-62.

15.Palinkas LA. Qualitative and mixed methods in mental health services and implementation research. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2014;43(6):851-61.

16.Peters S. Qualitative research methods in mental health. Evid Based Ment Health. 2010;13(2):35-40.

17.Astbury B, Leeuw FL. Unpacking Black Boxes: Mechanisms and Theory Building in Evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation. 2010;31(3):363-81.

18.Lambe P. Organising knowledge: Taxonomies, knowledge and organisational effectiveness. Oxford: Chandos.; 2007.

19.Bradley EH, Curry LA, Devers KJ. Qualitative data analysis for health services research: developing taxonomy, themes, and theory. Health services research. 2007;42(4):1758-72.

REFERENCES

7/08/2018

10

20.Monroe-DeVita M, Teague GB, Moser LL. The TMACT: a new tool for measuring fidelity to assertive community treatment. Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses

Association. 2011;17(1):17-29.

21.Evaluating new treatments in psychiatry: the potential value of combining qualitative and quantitative research methods. International review of psychiatry. 2002.

22.Fasoli SE, Chen CC. What do clinicians need from a rehabilitation treatment taxonomy? An alternate approach for describing treatment content versus process. Archives of

physical medicine and rehabilitation. 2014;95(1 Suppl):S74-6.

23.Fossey E, Harvey C, McDermott F, Davidson L. Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry. 2002;36(6):717-32.

24.Parker S, Dark F, Newman E, Korman N, Meurk C, Siskind D, et al. Longitudinal comparative evaluation of the equivalence of an integrated peer-support and clinical staffing

model for residential mental health rehabilitation: a mixed methods protocol incorporating multiple stakeholder perspectives. BMC psychiatry. 2016;16:179.

25.Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. International

journal of nursing studies. 2013;50(5):587-92.

26. Miles MB, Huberman AM, Saldaña J. Qualitative data analysis : a methods sourcebook / Matthew B. Miles, A. Michael Huberman, Johnny Saldana. Third edition.. ed: Thousand Oaks, Califorinia : SAGE Publications, Inc.; 2014.

27.Polit DF, Beck CT. Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: myths and strategies. International journal of nursing studies. 2010;47(11):1451-8.

28.Giacomini MK, Cook DJ, for the Evidence-Based Medicine Working G. Users' guides to the medical literature: Xxiii. qualitative research in health careb. what are the

results and how do they help me care for my patients? Jama. 2000;284(4):478-82.

29.Santiago-Delefosse M, Gavin A, Bruchez C, Roux P, Stephen SL. Quality of qualitative research in the health sciences: Analysis of the common criteria present in 58 assessment

guidelines by expert users. Soc Sci Med. 2016;148:142-51.

30.Dixon-Woods M, Sutton A, Shaw R, Miller T, Smith J, Young B, et al. Appraising qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: a quantitative and qualitative

comparison of three methods. Journal of health services research & policy. 2007;12(1):42-7.

31.Hannes K, Heyvaert M, Slegers K, Vandenbrande S, Van Nuland M. Exploring the Potential for a Consolidated Standard for Reporting Guidelines for Qualitative Research.

International Journal of Qualitative Methods. 2015;14(4):160940691561152.

32.Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International journal for

quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care / ISQua. 2007;19(6):349-57.

33.Smith SM, Mercer SW, Gunn J, van den Akker M, Fortin M. Enhancing research quality and reporting: why the Journal of Comorbidity is now publishing study protocols. Journal

of Comorbidity; Vol 4, No 1 (2014). 2014.

REFERENCES