The REFLECT is a rigorously developed, theory-informed analytic rubric, demonstrating adequate interrater reliability, face validity, feasibility, and acceptability. The REFLECT rubric is a reflective analysis innovation supporting development of a reflective clinician via formative assessment and enhanced crafting of faculty feedback to reflective narratives.
Literature reviews generally analyse and synthesis the evidence (or lack thereof) in a particular topic area and they are an increasingly popular form of scholarly activity. The scoping review is a popular literature review approach that has been adopted across the social and health sciences over the last fifteen years. With this upsurge in use, differences of opinion about how to analyse and report scoping reviews has also grown. Drawing on work carrying out a scoping review on oral health and child maltreatment, we put forward a structured approach to analysis and reporting of such reviews: the PAGER (Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence for practice and Research recommendations) framework. In this article, we reflect on the strengths and limitations of the framework, drawing on examples, laying out the methodological processes, and making suggestions as to how it might improve reporting. The article makes a contribution to efforts that seek to improve the reporting and utility of scoping reviews in health and social research.
Engaging with children as co-researchers: challenges, counter-challenges and solutions Abstract of 150 words Participatory approaches have become de rigueur in social research involving children. A growing trend is research by children where researchers engage (or employ) children as co-researchers or primary researchers. In this paper we critique the ethical, methodological and practical issues associated with this participatory approach. The discussion is framed around six challenges: 1) Children lack research competence; 2) A comprehensive training programme is required; 3) Insider/outsider perspectives are difficult to balance; 4) Remuneration is complex; 5) Power differentials need to be overcome; 6) Children need to be protected. For each challenge we propose a counter-challenge. Additionally, we offer pragmatic solutions to the issues raised, so that the paper holds practical utility to social researchers who utilise this type of participatory approach. Overall we argue that despite the approach's inherent challenges, children as researchers are a powerful conduit for other children's voices.
This paper is a discussion regarding vignette development and administration as a means of protecting research participants in social research. Health and social care researchers investigate a plethora of issues that may be sensitive or upsetting, for example, abuse or bereavement. This exposes participants to potential emotional harm caused by revisiting the original trauma. Using research methods that offer a protective layer is important. Evidence suggests that vignettes provide protection for research participants by placing distance between their experience and that of the vignette character. However, there are few methodological papers regarding vignette use. Utilising examples from our own research, we engage in a critical discussion regarding vignette development and administration. The paper offers a new framework to support researchers -particularly those in health and social care -in the development and administration of vignettes. We contend that the framework supports best practice in vignette use, particularly when researching sensitive issues.
Participatory research carried out by or with children, has become a well-established and valuable part of the research landscape investigating children's lives, views and needs. So too has a critical agenda about its ethical implications and methodological complexities. One criticism is that the involvement of children who may be considered 'vulnerable' or 'marginalised' has been slower to take root within mainstream participatory practice. This means that there has been less focus on how groups such as disabled children or children affected by abuse or neglect can shape and challenge adult-dominated types of knowledge and decision-making that are likely to affect them. This article reports on the findings of a qualitative systematic literature review of thirteen contemporary papers. The review was undertaken by a UK team in 2017. The included articles explored some core ethical and methodological issues involved in carrying out participatory research with vulnerable children and young people. It reports on three themes: 1) The extent to which participatory spaces could recalibrate opportunities and attention given to marginalised and silenced groups; 2) The ways in which these children and young people could develop skills and exercise political and moral agency through participatory activity, and, 3) How to facilitate meaningful engagement with individuals and groups and reconcile this with a critical appreciation of the important but limited nature of research as means of political and social change. The review provides a unique, contemporary analysis of participatory research with vulnerable children, illuminating in particular its conceptual complexities and contradictions, particularly regarding power, empowerment and voice. Its overall utility and interest is augmented by the disciplinary and geographical breadth of the included articles, rendering it relevant to many contexts and countries.
What is known about this topic • Domestic abuse is a serious public health issue.• Women who experience domestic abuse often conceal their experiences.• Health professionals' responses to domestic abuse are sometimes inadequate.
What this paper adds• Health professionals and abused women do not always share the same beliefs about domestic abuse.• Discussing abuse with women is something that health professionals find difficult, but women want to be asked.• Several practices can be adopted by health professionals to keep women safe post-disclosure, including 'code talk'.
AbstractDomestic abuse is increasingly recognised as a serious, worldwide public health concern. There is a significant body of literature regarding domestic abuse, but little is known about health professionals' beliefs about domestic abuse disclosure. In addition, the intersection between health professionals' beliefs and abused women's views remains uninvestigated. We report on a two-phase, qualitative study using Critical Incident Technique (CIT) that aimed to explore community health professionals' beliefs about domestic abuse and the issue of disclosure. We investigated this from the perspectives of both health professionals and abused women. The study took place in Scotland during 2011. The study was informed theoretically by the Common Sense Model of Self-Regulation of Health and Illness (CSM). This model is typically used in disease-orientated research. In our innovative use, however, CSM was used to study the social phenomenon, domestic abuse. The study involved semi-structured, individual CIT interviews with health professionals and focus groups with women who had experienced domestic abuse. Twenty-nine health professionals (Midwives, Health Visitors and General Practitioners) participated in the first phase of the study. In the second phase, three focus groups were conducted with a total of 14 women. Data were analysed using a combination of an inductive classification and framework analysis. Findings highlight the points of convergence and divergence between abused women's and health professionals' beliefs about abuse. Although there was some agreement, they do not always share the same views. For example, women want to be asked about abuse, but many health professionals do not feel confident or comfortable discussing the issue. Overall, the study shows the dynamic interaction between women's and health professionals' beliefs about domestic abuse and readiness to discuss and respond to it. Understanding these complex dynamics assists in the employment of appropriate strategies to support women post-disclosure.
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.