Making sense of grounded theory in medical education

Abstract

The significant strengths of grounded theory that have resulted in its enduring prominence in qualitative research include its clearly articulated analytical process and its emphasis on the generation of pragmatic theory that is grounded in the data of experience. When applied properly and thoughtfully, grounded theory can address research questions of significant relevance to the domain of medical education.

Know When to Rock the Boat: How Faculty Rationalize Students’ Behaviors

“…8 Briefly, grounded theory is a methodology used to develop a "wellintegrated set of concepts that provide a theoretical explanation" of a phenomenon. 8,9 In this study, a modified technique was used whereby we began with the set of themes developed from interviews with students in a previous study. 6 A group of 2-3 researchers and a highly qualified RA began coding sequential transcripts with the previous framework, using a constant comparative technique in an iterative manner with the original codes being revised as new themes (or interpretations) emerged from the data.…”

Using qualitative and mixed methodologies to explore hierarchy in the operating room

“…La taille d'échantillon finale est déterminée lorsque l'analyse atteint son point de « saturation », soit le point où toute analyse future de données rentrantes ne génère plus de nouvelles perspectives ou de nouveaux résultats pour la théorie émergente. 3,4,6,8 On a critiqué la recherche qualitative en lui reprochant d'être trop subjective, non généralisable et de manquer de transparence et de rigueur. 7 Il est accepté que les recherches quantitative et qualitative devraient disposer de critères différents en matière de rigueur étant donné leurs divergences en matière de paradigmes, d'objectifs et de méthodologies, mais le choix de ces critères fait l'objet de débats animés.…”

“…Parmi ceux-ci, on compte: une approche inductive des données avec un codage initial ouvert et vaste des mots et phrases avec des descripteurs; un échantillonnage théorique ciblé; une collecte et une analyse des données itératives dans lesquelles les données sont analysées peu après leur collecte; une comparaison constante des données actuelles et antérieures; un codage secondaire ou axial qui fusionne les codes en catégories de concepts plus vastes (ce qui génère des mémos permettant de mettre au point une compréhension évolutive des relations entre les concepts); et la production d'une théorie substantielle de la culmination de ce processus. [3][4][5]8 Kennedy et Lingard 8 font la distinction entre la recherche de la théorie à base empirique, qui utilise tous les éléments mentionnés ci-dessus, et les études qui utilisent l'approche de la théorie à base empirique pour leur analyse. Selon cette distinction, l'étude de Bould et coll.…”

“…Final sample size is determined when analysis reaches ''saturation'', i.e., the point at which further analysis of incoming data no longer produces any new insights or findings to the emergent theory. 3,4,6,8 Qualitative research has been critiqued as being too subjective, non-generalizable, and lacking in transparency and rigour. 7 It has been accepted that quantitative and qualitative research should have different criteria for rigour given their different paradigms, purposes, and methodologies, but the actual criteria have been vigorously debated.…”

“…These include: an inductive approach to the data with an initial broad and open coding of words and phrases with descriptors; purposeful theoretical sampling; iterative data gathering and analysis wherein data are analyzed shortly after collection; constant comparison of current and prior data; secondary or axial coding that merges codes under larger conceptual categories (which generates memos in order to develop an evolving understanding of the relationships amongst the concepts); and production of a substantive theory from the culmination of this process. [3][4][5]8 Kennedy and Lingard 8 distinguish between grounded theory research, which uses all the aforementioned elements, and studies that use the grounded theory approach to analysis. Bould et al's study 1 would fall into the latter category, as the qualitative phase is part of a mixed methods study, and sampling was neither iterative nor purposeful.…”