Multidisciplinary research teams that include faculty, students, and volunteers can be challenging and enriching for all participants. Although such teams are becoming commonplace, minimal guidance is available about strategies to enhance team effectiveness. In this article, the authors highlight strategies to guide qualitative teamwork through coordination of team members and tasks based on mutual adjustment. Using a grounded theory exemplar, they focus on issues of (a) building the team, (b) developing reflexivity and theoretical sensitivity, (c) tackling analytic and methodological procedures, and (d) developing dissemination guidelines. Sharing information, articulating project goals and elements, acknowledging variation in individual goals, and engaging in reciprocity and respectful collaboration are key elements of mutual adjustment. The authors summarize conclusions about the costs and benefits of the process.
Highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) adherence research has focused predominantly on individuals with less than optimal clinical outcomes; therefore, little is known about the experiences of individuals who sustain undetectable viral loads. The present study used a qualitative method to explore how individuals who have sustained undetectable viral loads account for their success, and to identify challenges, as well as possible needs, for continued success. Participants were 20 patients at an outpatient infectious disease clinic in an urban center. Participants completed two 60-minute interviews. The Critical Incident Technique was used to identify and classify critical incidents linked with sustaining treatment success. Of the 438 critical incidents collected, 316 were identified as helpful and 122 were identified as unhelpful. Helpful categories included resolving ambivalence, using personal strengths, and fostering helpful relationships. Unhelpful categories were mood, lack of social support, financial difficulties, and medication factors. Doing well on antiretroviral therapy is a dynamic process that requires ongoing attention from both the patient and care provider. The results of this study highlight the efforts of patients to maintain their health and remind care providers not to assume that patients are not facing continuous challenges. Findings from the present study suggest that psychosocial factors do contribute to improved clinical outcomes in patients taking HAART.
The efficacy of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) has been well documented, particularly among HIV-infected individuals with CD4 cell counts below 200/mm(3). Despite this, eligible individuals may continue to show some reluctance to use HAART. The present study explored the factors influencing patients' decision not to take HAART even though it was medically indicated according to current treatment guidelines and available at no cost to the individual. Fifteen eligible patients at an urban HIV clinic were interviewed regarding the barriers that affected their decision to decline HAART. Most participants had previous experience with antiretroviral therapy and though most believed that HAART was beneficial and felt confident that they could adhere to treatment, they did not feel HAART was the right choice for them at the present time. The Critical Incident Technique was used to identify and classify incidents participants identified as influencing their decision not to take HAART. A total of four categories emerged from the data: Medication Factors, Mood, Lack of Support, and Outcome Expectancies. The results of this study highlight the ambivalence individuals may feel when faced with the prospect of taking HAART. The extent to which each of these factors influenced their decision differed substantially among participants. Suggestions for possible clinical interventions that can be used to address these concerns are offered.
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.