standing interest in the use of qualitative methods in 'real world' research, especially in community health and social care settings. His research interests include professional identities and inter-professional relations in community palliative care, psychological aspects of contact with nature and ethics in qualitative research. King is well-known for his work on Template Analysis and, more recently, the development of a visual interview technique known as 'Pictor.'
The use of diagrams to stimulate dialogue in research interviews, a technique known as graphic elicitation, has burgeoned since the year 2000. Reviews of the graphic elicitation literature have relied on the inconsistent terminology currently used to index visual methods, and have so far drawn only a partial picture of their use. Individual diagrams are seen as stand-alone tools, often linked to particular disciplines, rather than as images created from a toolbox of common elements which can be customized to suit a research study. There is a need to examine participant-led diagramming with a view to matching the common elements of diagrams with the objectives of a research project. This article aims to provide an overview of diagramming techniques used in qualitative data collection with individual participants, to relate the features of diagrams to the aspects of the social world they represent, and to suggest how to choose a technique to suit a research question.
Background: Malignant bowel obstruction occurs in up to 50% of people with advanced ovarian and 15% of people with gastrointestinal cancers. Evaluation and comparison of interventions to manage symptoms are hampered by inconsistent evaluations of efficacy and lack of agreed core outcomes. The patient perspective is rarely incorporated. Aim: To synthesise the qualitative data regarding patient, caregiver and healthcare professionals’ views and experience of malignant bowel obstruction to inform the development of a core outcome set for the evaluation of malignant bowel obstruction. Design: A qualitative systematic review was conducted, with narrative synthesis. The review protocol was registered prospectively ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero , CRD42020176393). Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Scopus databases were searched for studies published between 2010 and 2021. Reference lists were screened for further relevant publications, and citation tracking was performed. Results: Nine papers were included, reporting on seven studies which described the views and experiences of malignant bowel obstruction through the perspectives of 75 patients, 13 caregivers and 62 healthcare professionals. Themes across the papers included symptom burden, diverse experiences of interventions, impact on patient quality of life, implications and trajectory of malignant bowel obstruction, mixed experience of communication and the importance of realistic goals of care. Conclusion: Some of the most devastating sequelae of malignant bowel obstruction, such as pain and psychological distress, are not included routinely in its clinical or research evaluation. These data will contribute to a wider body of work to ensure the patient and caregiver perspective is recognised in the development of a core outcome set.
Advancing Qualitative Methods Collaborative working is a commonplace of contemporary health and social care. In almost all settings-be it primary, secondary, or tertiary health care, community or institutional social care-the provision of good-quality services is reliant on different professional groups working effectively with each other and with service users. When things go drastically wrong, the failure of professionals to work well together is often a major contributory factor, as can be seen in high-profile cases such as that in the United Kingdom of 17-month-old "Baby Peter," who died after prolonged physical abuse and neglect by his mother and two other adults, despite the involvement of multiple health and social care agencies (Haringey Local Safeguarding Children Board, 2009). Even when the consequences are less tragic, failings in collaborative working might be costly (for instance, through sickness absenteeism;
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.