Qualitative research: specific designs for qualitative research in emergency care?

Abstract

This article follows our description of generic qualitative approaches, focusing on the specific designs of ethnography, grounded theory and phenomenology. Distinguishing features are described, including methodological approaches and methods for enhancing rigour. The use of these designs in emergency care is unusual but informative, and important work has been produced. Whether used in a pure or applied manner, it is likely that such approaches will add to our understanding of the emergency world.

Patient and provider perspectives on Bedsider.org, an online contraceptive information tool, in a low income, racially diverse clinic population

“…Evaluation of focus group data employed standard qualitative research methods [11][12][13], including iterative transcript examination by four separate reviewers (GG, LL, CD, AG) using the constant comparative method and grounded theory methodology [14] to identify key concepts and specific domains. Reviewers independently evaluated transcripts and notes, discussed overall impressions and identified salient themes by consensus among the reviewers.…”

Mixed methods research: a design for emergency care research?

“…Less obtrusive methods such as broadly focused respondent diaries, or equal distribution of data collection between control and experimental groups,6 may resolve the issue. The validity and reliability (rigour) of the data is confirmed by the standard method for each approach,1 2 for example with sample power calculations and aiming for thematic ‘saturation’. However, Creswell and Plano Clark6 also advise that validity and reliability are discussed (and the threats made clear) within the context of the mixed approach, with validity defined in the mixed methods context as the ‘ability of the researcher to draw meaningful and accurate conclusions from all the data in the study’.…”

“…In our previous work we have described generic (or descriptive) approaches to qualitative research,1 the more focused qualitative approaches of grounded theory, phenomenology and ethnography2; and the pragmatic problem resolution approaches used in action research/learning 3. While not without its critics,4 5 mixed method approaches, using qualitative and quantitative approaches in the same study,6 are commonly adopted by pragmatists7 who employ diverse approaches ‘that work’, while valuing subjective and objective knowledge.…”

Improving emergency care pathways: an action research approach

“…Action research commonly involves mixed methods, but, unlike conventional mixed methods approaches, the reflexive nature of data collection does not allow decisions about timing, weight and mixing of data10 11 to be made entirely a priori. Nevertheless, a successful action research report is characterised by a ‘shock of recognition’12 by those whose actions it describes.…”