Two sets of qualitative research reporting guidelines: An analysis of the shortfalls.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
  • Author(s): King O;King O;King O;King O
  • Source:
    Research in nursing & health [Res Nurs Health] 2021 Aug; Vol. 44 (4), pp. 715-723. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 May 20.
  • Publication Type:
    Journal Article
  • Language:
    English
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: Wiley Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 7806136 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1098-240X (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 01606891 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Res Nurs Health Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Original Publication: New York, Wiley.
    • Subject Terms:
    • Abstract:
      Findings from qualitative research may make valuable contributions to the evidence informing healthcare practice. Qualitative research methodologies and methods, however, are less familiar to health researchers and research consumers when compared with quantitative methods. Qualitative research reporting guidelines and their merit have been hotly debated for at least two decades. Herein I discuss two sets of qualitative research reporting guidelines endorsed by many high tiered health research journals: Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research and Standards for reporting qualitative research. Six aspects of the two sets of guidelines are compared. The first aspect is the focus of the guidelines. The latter five aspects are items included in the guidelines: reflexivity, participant sampling and saturation, data collection, member checking, and data analysis. Except for reflexivity, these items were selected for comparison as they include features of, or strategies to, enhance the rigor of qualitative research that are applicable within some but not all qualitative methodologies. Reflexivity, a central feature of rigor within all qualitative research, is discussed for its suboptimal representation in both sets of reporting guidelines. Without regular and critical review of reporting guidelines, efforts to promote the design, conduct, and reporting of rigorous qualitative health research to support evidence-informed practice may be undermined. Moreover, for qualitative research reporting guidelines to be useful, they must be applied appropriately and in a flexible manner by researchers and reviewers. This paper has implications for researchers, journal editors, reviewers, and research consumers.
      (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)
    • References:
      Al-Moghrabi, D., Tsichlaki, A., Alkadi, S., & Fleming, P. S. (2019). How well are dental qualitative studies involving interviews and focus groups reported? Journal of Dentistry, 84, 44-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2019.03.001.
      Barry, C. A., Britten, N., Barber, N., Bradley, C., & Stevenson, F. (1999). Using reflexivity to optimize teamwork in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 9(1), 26-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973299129121677.
      Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don't: Researcher's position and reflexivity in. qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219-234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475.
      Birt, L., Scott, S., Cavers, D., Campbell, C., & Walter, F. (2016). Member checking: A tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation? Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1802-1811. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316654870.
      Bowen, G. A. (2008). Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: A research note. Qualitative Research, 8(1), 137-152. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794107085301.
      Bradbury-Jones, C., Breckenridge, J., Clark, M. T., Herber, O. R., Wagstaff, C., & Taylor, J. (2017). The state of qualitative research in health and social science literature: A focused mapping review and synthesis. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20(6), 627-645. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1270583.
      Bradbury-Jones, C. (2007). Enhancing rigour in qualitative health research: Exploring subjectivity through Peshkin's I's. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 59(3), 290-298. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04306.x.
      Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 13, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1704846.
      Braun, V., Clarke, V., Boulton, E., Davey, L., & McEvoy, C. (2020). The online survey as a qualitative research tool. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2020.1805550.
      Breckenridge, J., & Jones, D. (2009). Demystifying theoretical sampling in grounded theory research. Grounded Theory Review, 8(2), 113-126.
      Bunniss, S., & Kelly, D. R. (2010). Research paradigms in medical education research. Medical Education, 44(4), 358-366. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03611.x.
      Buus, N., & Perron, A. (2020). The quality of quality criteria: Replicating the development of the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ). International Journal of Nursing Studies, 102, 103452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.103452.
      Bynum, W., & Varpio, L. (2018). When I say… hermeneutic phenomenology. Medical Education, 52(3), 252-253. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13414.
      Carter, S. M., & Little, M. (2007). Justifying knowledge, justifying method, taking action: Epistemologies, methodologies, and methods in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 17(10), 1316-1328. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732307306927.
      Chapple, A., & Rogers, A. (1998). Explicit guidelines for qualitative research: A step in the right direction, a defence of the 'soft' option, or a form of sociological imperialism? Family Practice, 15(6), 556-561. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/15.6.556.
      Charmaz, K. & Belgrave, L. (2012). Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. In J. F. Gubrium, J. A. Holstein, A. B. Mavasti, & K. D. McKinney (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of interview research: The complexity of the craft (Vol. 2, pp. 347-365). Sage Publications.
      Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. (2002). 10 questions to help you make sense of qualitative research. Public Health Resource Unit England.
      Davis, C., King, O. A., Clemans, A., Coles, J., Crampton, P., Jacobs, N., Mckeown, T., Morphet, J., Seear, K., & Rees, C. E. (2020). Student dignity during work-integrated learning: A qualitative study exploring student and supervisors' perspectives. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 25(1), 149-172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-019-09914-4.
      Dixon-Woods, M., Shaw, R. L., Agarwal, S., & Smith, J. A. (2004). The problem of appraising qualitative research. BMJ Quality & Safety, 13(3), 223-225. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2003.008714.
      EQUATOR Network. (n.d.). EQUATOR Network: What we do and how we are organised. Retrieved from https://www.equator-network.org/about-us/equator-network-what-we-do-and-how-we-are-organised/. Accessed May 2, 2021.
      Fowler, F. J. (2009). Evaluating survey questions and Instruments, Survey Research Methods (4th ed., pp. 114-126). SAGE publications.
      Fusch, P. I., & Ness, L. R. (2015). Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 20(9), 1408.
      Greenhalgh, T., Annandale, E., Ashcroft, R., Barlow, J., Black, N., Bleakley, A., Boaden, R., Braithwaite, J., Britten, N., Carnevale, F., Checkland, K., Cheek, J., Clark, A., Cohn, S., Coulehan, J., Crabtree, B., Cummins, S., Davidoff, F., Davies, H., … Ziebland, S. (2016). An open letter to The BMJ editors on qualitative research. BMJ, 352, 563. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i563.
      Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 29(2), 75-92. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766777.
      Hansen, E. C. (2020). Successful qualitative health research: A practical introduction. Routledge.
      Kallio, H., Pietilä, A. M., Johnson, M., & Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological review: developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(12), 2954-2965. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13031.
      Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
      Malterud, K., Siersma, V. D., & Guassora, A. D. (2016). Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power. Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1753-1760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444.
      Mann, K., & MacLeod, A. (2015). Constructivism: Learning theories and approaches to research. In S. J. D. Clelend (Ed.), Researching medical education (pp. 51-65). Wiley Blackwell.
      Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative researching (2nd ed.). Sage.
      Morse, J. (2021). Why the qualitative health research (QHR) review process does not use checklists. Qualitative Health Research, 31(5), 819-821.
      Morse, J. M. (2000). Determining sample size. Qualitative Health Research, 10(1), 3-5. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973200129118183.
      Morse, J. M. (2015a). Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 25(9), 1212-1222. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315588501.
      Morse, J. M. (2015b). Data were saturated. Qualitative Health Research, 25(5), 587-588. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315576699.
      Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 13-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690200100202.
      Morse, W. C., Lowery, D. R., & Steury, T. (2014). Exploring saturation of themes and spatial locations in qualitative public participation geographic information systems research. Society & Natural Resources, 27(5), 557-571. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2014.888791.
      Neubauer, B. E., Witkop, C. T., & Varpio, L. (2019). How phenomenology can help us learn from the experiences of others. Perspectives on Medical Education, 8(2), 90-97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-019-0509-2.
      O'Brien, B. C., Harris, I. B., Beckman, T. J., Reed, D. A., & Cook, D. A. (2014). Standards for reporting qualitative research: A synthesis of recommendations. Academic Medicine, 89(9), 1245-1251. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000388.
      Patton, M. (2002). In T Oaks (Ed.), Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
      Pickstone, C., Nancarrow, S., Cooke, J., Vernon, W., Mountain, G., Boyce, R. A., & Campbell, J. (2008). Building research capacity in the allied health professions. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 4(1), 53-68. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426408783477864.
      Richards, D. A., Coulthard, V., & Borglin, G., Reflection Review Team. (2014). The state of European nursing research: dead, alive, or chronically diseased? A systematic literature review. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 11(3), 147-155. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12039.
      Ritchie, J., & Spencer, L. (1994). Analysing qualitative data. In A. Bryman, & R. Burgess (Eds.), Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research (pp. 173-194). Routledge.
      Saunders, B., Sim, J., Kingstone, T., Baker, S., Waterfield, J., Bartlam, B., Burroughs, H., & Jinks, C. (2018). Saturation in qualitative research: Exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality & quantity, 52(4), 1893-1907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8.
      Smith, G. D., Gelling, L., Haigh, C., Barnason, S., Allan, H. T., & Jackson, D. (2018). The position of reporting guidelines in qualitative nursing research. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 27(5-6), 889-891. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14213.
      Smith, J. A. (2019). Participants and researchers searching for meaning: Conceptual developments for interpretative phenomenological analysis. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 16(2), 166-181. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2018.1540648.
      Spencer, L., Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., & Dillon, L. (2003). Quality in qualitative evaluation: a framework for assessing research evidence. Cabinet Office.
      Tai, J., & Ajjawi, R. (2016). Undertaking and reporting qualitative research. The Clinical Teacher, 13(3), 175-182. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.12552.
      Thorne, S., & Darbyshire, P. (2005). Land mines in the field: A modest proposal for improving the craft of qualitative health research. Qualitative Health Research, 15(8), 1105-1113. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305278502.
      Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349-357. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042.
      Varpio, L., Ajjawi, R., Monrouxe, L. V., O'Brien, B. C., & Rees, C. E. (2017). Shedding the cobra effect: problematising thematic emergence, triangulation, saturation and member checking. Medical Education, 51(1), 40-50. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13124.
      Varpio, L., Martimianakis, M. A. T., & Mylopoulos, M. (2015). Qualitative research methodologies: embracing methodological borrowing, shifting and importing. In J. Cleland, & S. J. Durning (Eds.), Researching medical education (Vol. 18, p. 245). Wiley-Blackwell.
      Varpio, L., O'Brien, B., Rees, C. E., Monrouxe, L., Ajjawi, R., & Paradis, E. (2020). The applicability of generalisability and bias to health professions education's research. Medical Education, 55, 167-173. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14348.
      Vindrola-Padros, C., Chisnall, G., Cooper, S., Dowrick, A., Djellouli, N., Symmons, S. M., Martin, S., Singleton, G., Vanderslott, S., Vera, N., & Johnson, G. A. (2020). Carrying out rapid qualitative research during a pandemic: Emerging lessons from COVID-19. Qualitative Health Research, 30, 2192-2204. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732320951526.
      Walsh, S., Jones, M., Bressington, D., McKenna, L., Brown, E., Terhaag, S., & Gray, R. (2020). Adherence to COREQ reporting guidelines for qualitative research: A scientometric study in nursing social science. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5, 19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920982145.
    • Contributed Indexing:
      Keywords: epistemology*; methodological research*; philosophy of science*; qualitative methods*
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20210521 Date Completed: 20210824 Latest Revision: 20210824
    • Publication Date:
      20220301
    • Accession Number:
      10.1002/nur.22157
    • Accession Number:
      34018217