A context-consent meta-framework for designing open (qualitative) data studies

Branney, Peter; Reid, Kate; Frost, Nollaig; Coan, S; Mathieson, A. McL; Woolhouse, Maxine

doi:10.1080/14780887.2019.1605477

Cited by 29 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…52 Careful consideration must be given to the appropriateness of certain open science practices for primary qualitative research, such as open data sharing and the ethical, confidentiality and sensitivity issues of this. 53 While there exists debates as to the extent to which such open science practices may be possible in primary qualitative research, 53 researchers could consider at the earliest stage of research design how and where open practices might be appropriate in their research.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimising the value of the critical appraisal skills programme (CASP) tool for quality appraisal in qualitative evidence synthesis

Long

French

Brooks

2020

Research Methods in Medicine & Health Sciences

476

371

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The value of qualitative evidence synthesis for informing healthcare policy and practice within evidence-based medicine is increasingly recognised. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding how to judge the methodological quality of qualitative studies being synthesised and debates around the extent to which such assessment is possible and appropriate. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tool is the most commonly used tool for quality appraisal in health-related qualitative evidence syntheses, with endorsement from the Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group. The tool is recommended for novice qualitative researchers, but there is little existing guidance on its application. This article considers issues related to the suitability and usability of the CASP tool for quality appraisal in qualitative evidence synthesis in order to support and improve future appraisal exercises framed by the tool. We reflect on our practical experience of using the tool in a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis. We discuss why it is worth considering a study’s underlying theoretical, ontological and epistemological framework and how this could be incorporated into the tool by way of a novel question. We consider how particular features of the tool may impact its interpretation, the appraisal results and the subsequent synthesis. We discuss how to use quality appraisal results to inform the next stages of evidence synthesis and present a novel approach to organising the synthesis, whereby studies deemed to be of higher quality contribute relatively more to the synthesis. We propose tool modifications, user guidance, and areas for future methodological research.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimising the value of the critical appraisal skills programme (CASP) tool for quality appraisal in qualitative evidence synthesis

Long

French

Brooks

2020

Research Methods in Medicine & Health Sciences

476

371

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Others have outlined concerns surrounding missing layers of interpretation and the importance of consent as an ongoing process. 140 Researchers should handle datasets involving information from vulnerable populations (e.g., sexual assault survivors or refugees) with care so that participants' personal information is appropriately protected. Fortunately, many data repositories offer access controls so that researchers may embargo data or provide conditions for access if desired (Table 2).…”

Section: (C) Qualitative Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving the Credibility of Empirical Legal Research: Practical Suggestions for Researchers, Journals and Law Schools

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fields closely related to empirical legal research (ELR) are enhancing their methods to improve the credibility of their findings. This includes making data, analysis codes and other materials openly available on digital repositories and preregistering studies. There are numerous benefits to these practices, such as research being easier to find and access through digital research methods. However, ELR appears to be lagging cognate fields. This may be partly due to a lack of field-specific meta-research and guidance. We sought to fill that gap by first evaluating credibility indicators in ELR, including a review of guidelines for legal journals. This review finds considerable room for improvement in how law journals regulate ELR. The remainder of the article provides practical guidance for the field. We start with general recommendations for empirical legal researchers and then turn to recommendations aimed at three commonly used empirical legal methods: content analyses of judicial decisions, surveys and qualitative studies. We end with suggestions for journals and law schools.

show abstract

“…The popularization of a positivist Open Science framework has direct ramifications for qualitative ECRs. The principles of open data do not translate well to qualitative approaches, due to enhanced ethical issues such as increased risk of participant identification (Chauvette et al, 2019) and challenges relating to data ownership (Branney et al, 2019). If ECRs' qualitative research does not fit within an Open Science framework, their career outcomes may be adversely impacted and their work regarded as less rigorous and consequently less publishable (Siegel & LaMarre, 2019).…”

Section: Open Science In Qualitative Early Career Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As well as pedagogic improvement, support for qualitative feminist ECRs in Open Science is urgently needed to improve ECRs sense of belonging in academia (McAlpine et al, 2014).Despite these challenges, adopting Open Science practices also has the potential to benefit qualitative ECRs. By providing concrete examples of how research develops, preregistration and ongoing documentation of qualitative projects may strongly increase transparency and encourage knowledge exchange(Branney et al, 2019;Haven & van Grootel, 2019). For example,Tsai et al (2016) suggest that qualitative researchers could make transcription rules, coding units, and processes for code development available.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Navigating Open Science as Early Career Feminist Researchers

Pownall¹,

Talbot²,

Henschel³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open Science aims to improve the rigour, robustness, and reproducibility of psychological research. Despite resistance from some academics, the Open Science movement has been championed by some Early Career Researchers (ECRs), who have proposed innovative new tools and methods to promote and employ open research principles. Feminist ECRs have much to contribute to this emerging way of doing research. However, they face unique barriers, which may prohibit their full engagement with the Open Science movement. We, ten feminist ECRs in psychology, from a diverse range of academic and personal backgrounds, explore Open Science through a feminist lens, to consider how voice and power may be negotiated in unique ways for ECRs. Taking a critical and intersectional approach, we discuss how feminist early career research may be complemented or challenged by shifts towards Open Science. We also propose how ECRs can act as grassroots changemakers within the context of academic precarity. We identify ways in which Open Science can benefit from feminist epistemology and end with six practical recommendations for feminist ECRs who wish to engage with Open Science practices in their own research.

show abstract

A context-consent meta-framework for designing open (qualitative) data studies

Abstract: The material cannot be used for any other purpose without further permission of the publisher and is for private use only.There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher's version if you wish to cite from it.

Cited by 29 publications

References 16 publications

Optimising the value of the critical appraisal skills programme (CASP) tool for quality appraisal in qualitative evidence synthesis

Optimising the value of the critical appraisal skills programme (CASP) tool for quality appraisal in qualitative evidence synthesis

Improving the Credibility of Empirical Legal Research: Practical Suggestions for Researchers, Journals and Law Schools

Navigating Open Science as Early Career Feminist Researchers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About