Examination of the qualitative methodological literature shows that there appear to be conflicting opinions and unresolved issues regarding the nature and process of grounded theory. Researchers proposing to utilize this method would therefore be wise to consider these conflicting opinions. This paper therefore identifies and attempts to address four key issues, namely, sampling, creativity and reflexivity, the use of literature, and precision within grounded theory. The following recommendations are made. When utilizing a grounded method researchers need to consider their research question, clarify what level of theory is likely to be induced from their study, and then decide when they intend to access and introduce the second body of literature. They should acknowledge that in the early stages of data collection, some purposeful sampling appears to occur. In their search for conceptually dense theory, grounded theory researchers may wish to free themselves from the constraints that limit their use of creativity and tacit knowledge. Furthermore, the interests of researchers might be served by attention to issues of precision including, avoiding method slurring, ensuring theoretical coding occurs, and using predominantly one method of grounded theory while explaining and describing any deviation away from this chosen method. Such mindfulness and the resulting methodological rigour is likely to increase the overall quality of the inquiry and enhance the credibility of the findings.

Qualitative research is increasingly recognized and valued and its unique place in nursing research is highlighted by many. Despite this, some nurse researchers continue to raise epistemological issues about the problems of objectivity and the validity of qualitative research findings. This paper explores the issues relating to the representativeness or credibility of qualitative research findings. It therefore critiques the existing distinct philosophical and methodological positions concerning the trustworthiness of qualitative research findings, which are described as follows: quantitative studies should be judged using the same criteria and terminology as quantitative studies; it is impossible, in a meaningful way, for any criteria to be used to judge qualitative studies; qualitative studies should be judged using criteria that are developed for and fit the qualitative paradigm; and the credibility of qualitative research findings could be established by testing out the emerging theory by means of conducting a deductive quantitative study. The authors conclude by providing some guidelines for establishing the credibility of qualitative research findings.

Psychiatric/mental health (P/MH) nursing has rightly been described as a 'broad church', and one that contains many contested matters and areas of differing opinion. One such contested matter is that of the appropriate care for the person who is at risk of suicide. Recent, albeit limited, debate of this issue has taken place, and the literature, such as it is, indicates two principal (though linked) positions. These can be summarized as the 'engagement and hope inspiration' position and the 'observations' position. Given the P/MH nurse's unique position in providing 24-hour, day-to-day care to suicidal clients and the growing problem of suicide within people who suffer from mental health problems, it is both necessary and perhaps timely to consider this debate in more detail. Accordingly, this paper considers the debate regarding care for suicidal mental health care clients. First, the paper briefly describes the historical policy context of care for the suicidal client. Next, it focuses on 'observations' and concludes that there is a range of well-established, empirically based problems or drawbacks to this approach. Following this, it focuses on 'engagement, inspiring hope' and points out the key processes of engagement: forming a relationship, a human-human connection, conveying acceptance and tolerance, and hearing and understanding. The value and importance of these most fundamental of interpersonal processes is described and alluded to throughout the limited research into care of the suicidal client. The paper then describes the range of criticisms that have been levelled at the engagement-inspiring hope approach and considers these criticisms in more detail. As a result of this detailed examination, the paper then reiterates the need to replace 'observations' with 'engagement-hope inspiration' as the principal approach to caring for suicidal mental health clients.

No abstract

Decision-making about the ethics of qualitative research is problematic where the research design is emergent, and the balance between risks and benefits for research subjects are difficult to ascertain prior to study implementation. The discourses of health/medical research ethics and those of social research are shown to be divergent and, furthermore, where ethics committees tie themselves to the health/medical model of ethical decision-making, qualitative research approaches can be disadvantaged. Having demonstrated the dual discourses and their relevance to qualitative research ethics, a critical review of current approaches to maximising the success of qualitative research proposals being considered for approval by ethics committees is undertaken. This leads to a call for a system of monitoring qualitative research so that the "benefit to risk" ratio is always on the side of benefit. This has implications for the ways in which ethics committees are organised and the ways in which they function.