Beyond Exploratory: A Tailored Framework for Assessing Rigor in Qualitative Health Services Research

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Embargo Date

Degree type

Discipline

Subject

Qualitative research
health services research
research methodology
patient-centered outcomes
Medicine and Health Sciences

Funder

Grant number

License

Copyright date

Distributor

Related resources

Author

Abramson, Corey M
Garrett, Sarah B
Halley, Meghan C
Dohan, Daniel

Contributor

Abstract

Objective: To propose a framework for assessing the rigor of qualitative research that identifies and distinguishes between the diverse objectives of qualitative studies currently used in patient-centered outcomes and health services research (PCOR and HSR). Study Design: Narrative review of published literature discussing qualitative guidelines and standards in peer-reviewed journals and national funding organizations that support PCOR and HSR. Principal Findings: We identify and distinguish three objectives of current qualitative studies in PCOR and HSR: exploratory, descriptive, and comparative. For each objective, we propose methodological standards that can be used to assess and improve rigor across all study phases—from design to reporting. Similar to quantitative studies, we argue that standards for qualitative rigor differ, appropriately, for studies with different objectives and should be evaluated as such. Conclusions: Distinguishing between different objectives of qualitative HSR improves the ability to appreciate variation in qualitative studies as well as appropriately evaluate the rigor and success of studies in meeting their own objectives. Researchers, funders, and journal editors should consider how adopting the criteria for assessing qualitative rigor outlined here may advance the rigor and potential impact of qualitative research in patient-centered outcomes and health services research.

Advisor

Date Range for Data Collection (Start Date)

Date Range for Data Collection (End Date)

Digital Object Identifier

Series name and number

Publication date

2017-08-01

Journal title

Volume number

Issue number

Publisher

Publisher DOI

Journal Issues

Comments

This article has been submitted for review in a peer-review journal.

Recommended citation

Collection