&lt;p&gt;Difference and Commonness Among CLP, NON-CLP Patients and Their Parents Seeking for Orthodontic Treatment: A Questionnaire Applying Q Methodology to Investigate Motives&lt;/p&gt;

Tang, Xia; Tong, Qian; Li, Zhujun; Chen, Zhiyi; Weng, Mengjia; Zhang, Xiaoyu; Huang, Sijing; Yang, Chen; Chen, Zhenqi

doi:10.2147/ppa.s224254

Cited by 3 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The numbers of statements in a final Q-set ranged from 16–275 (Mdn = 42). Nine studies [ 65 , 95 , 103 , 108 – 113 ] (3.1%) used multiple Q-sets for different participant groups. Two studies (0.7%) did not report the number of statements used.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Twelve studies (4.2%) did not include a negative value, for example, + 1 to + 9. Two studies [ 65 , 113 ] (0.7%) involved the administration of two Q-sets with different ranking scales. In Flurey et al’s study of rheumatoid arthritis, [ 65 ] participants were first asked to sort 39 statements regarding their daily experiences of living with rheumatoid arthritis from least agree (-5) to most agree (+ 5).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They were then asked to sort a different Q-set comprising 23 statements regarding their help-seeking behaviours, from least agree (-4) to most agree (+ 4). Tang and colleagues [ 113 ] asked orthodontic patients to sort 30 statements about the reasons for wearing braces, ranked from -4 to + 4. They also asked patients’ parents to sort 35 cards about the reasons for their children’s orthodontic treatment, ranked from -5 to + 5.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A scoping review of Q-methodology in healthcare research

Churruca

Ludlow

et al. 2021

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Q-methodology is an approach to studying complex issues of human ‘subjectivity’. Although this approach was developed in the early twentieth century, the value of Q-methodology in healthcare was not recognised until relatively recently. The aim of this review was to scope the empirical healthcare literature to examine the extent to which Q-methodology has been utilised in healthcare over time, including how it has been used and for what purposes. Methods A search of three electronic databases (Scopus, EBSCO-CINAHL Complete, Medline) was conducted. No date restriction was applied. A title and abstract review, followed by a full-text review, was conducted by a team of five reviewers. Included articles were English-language, peer-reviewed journal articles that used Q-methodology (both Q-sorting and inverted factor analysis) in healthcare settings. The following data items were extracted into a purpose-designed Excel spreadsheet: study details (e.g., setting, country, year), reasons for using Q-methodology, healthcare topic area, participants (type and number), materials (e.g., ranking anchors and Q-set), methods (e.g., development of the Q-set, analysis), study results, and study implications. Data synthesis was descriptive in nature and involved frequency counting, open coding and the organisation by data items. Results Of the 2,302 articles identified by the search, 289 studies were included in this review. We found evidence of increased use of Q-methodology in healthcare, particularly over the last 5 years. However, this research remains diffuse, spread across a large number of journals and topic areas. In a number of studies, we identified limitations in the reporting of methods, such as insufficient information on how authors derived their Q-set, what types of analyses they performed, and the amount of variance explained. Conclusions Although Q-methodology is increasingly being adopted in healthcare research, it still appears to be relatively novel. This review highlight commonalities in how the method has been used, areas of application, and the potential value of the approach. To facilitate reporting of Q-methodological studies, we present a checklist of details that should be included for publication.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A scoping review of Q-methodology in healthcare research

Churruca

Ludlow

et al. 2021

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Stage 1-develop the Q-statements: This means collecting statements that cover discrete ideas and concepts of the topic (22). This step aimed to find the barriers to nurse-physician collaboration in the literature.…”

Section: Design and Setting Of The Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Stage 3-participant selection (P-sample): Use purposive sampling to recruit participants who can articulate viewpoints on the topic because their opinions are important (22). The 30 nurses and nursing faculty members working or providing education in ICUs were invited to sort the statements.…”

Section: Design and Setting Of The Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Nurses’ Perspectives About Barriers of Nurse-Physician Collaboration in Intensive Care Units: A Q-Methodology Study

Hasanabadi¹,

Taebi²,

Alavi³

2023

Mod Care J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Nurse-physician collaboration is essential for providing effective and safe patient care in intensive care units. Objectives: This study aimed to determine the different viewpoints of nurses working in intensive care units about the barriers to nurse-physician collaboration in Kashan/Iran by 2020. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study that employed a Q-methodology approach. Thirty intensive care nurses sorted the 24 statements into a 9-column Q-sort diagram ranging from -4 as not important to +4 as very important. The data were analyzed with PQMethod 2.35 software. The centroid factor analysis and varimax rotation were used for data analysis. The corresponding people for each extraction factor in the Q methodology were grouped and classified, and distinguishing statements were determined. Results: Four viewpoints were determined that could explain the 52.95% variance in the barriers to nurse-physician collaboration. The factors were named as different professional interests and lack of trust between nurses and physicians (26.77% of variance), goal confusion (10.74% of variance), systemic barriers to collaboration (8.17% of variance), and personal differences (7.25% of variance). Conclusions: Nurses had different viewpoints about barriers to nurse-physician collaboration. Different strategies and solutions are needed to improve collaboration, such as education, defining common goals, enhancing collaborative culture, and reaching mutual respect and understanding. Effective teamwork is essential for patient safety and a healthy work environment.

show abstract

Knowledge, attitude and practice of patients towards orthodontic treatment

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Orthodontic treatment is a time-consuming and highly technique-sensitive clinical procedure. A patient's comprehension and compliance with oral hygiene instructions and appliance maintenance are critical to the success of orthodontic treatment. This study was performed to assess the knowledge, attitude and practice of patients seen at government orthodontic clinics in the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya towards orthodontic treatment. Methods A validated, bilingual, self-administered questionnaire comprising fifteen questions across the domains of Knowledge, Attitude and Practice was used and responses were assessed with 3 responses; one correct, one incorrect and one reflecting uncertainty. 507 patients from five orthodontic centres participated in this study. Data was analysed using SPSS. Continuous data was summarised as mean and standard deviation or median and inter-quartile range, as appropriate. Categorical data was summarised as frequency and percentage, then univariable analysis was carried out with Pearson’s chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate. Results The mean age of respondents was 22.5 years (SD ± 2.8). A majority of respondents were female (64.1%) and from the lowest income bracket or B40 group (71%). Overall, for the knowledge domain, a majority of the respondents got all questions correct. 69.4% of patients were aware that incomplete treatment could lead to worsening of their malocclusion. 80.9% of respondents were aware of the need for a retainer upon completion of their orthodontic treatment. For the attitude section, 64.7% felt that they had to wait a very long time to see the orthodontist. In the Practice domain, the majority only got two of the five questions correct. Only 39.8% of respondents made an effort to alter dietary habits all of the time. In general, females and those with tertiary education fared better for all three domains. Conclusions The orthodontic patients in the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya possess good knowledge about their treatment however their attitude and orthodontic related practices need to be improved.

show abstract

<p>Difference and Commonness Among CLP, NON-CLP Patients and Their Parents Seeking for Orthodontic Treatment: A Questionnaire Applying Q Methodology to Investigate Motives</p>

Cited by 3 publications

References 50 publications

A scoping review of Q-methodology in healthcare research

A scoping review of Q-methodology in healthcare research

The Nurses’ Perspectives About Barriers of Nurse-Physician Collaboration in Intensive Care Units: A Q-Methodology Study

Knowledge, attitude and practice of patients towards orthodontic treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About