Literature DB >> 10885207

Critical appraisal checklist for qualitative research studies.

C Treloar1, S Champness, P L Simpson, N Higginbotham.   

Abstract

The ability to critically appraise literature is an essential skill for clinicians adopting a population perspective. Conventions exist for reporting and evaluating the quality of quantitative and epidemiological research. The same traditions do not exist in qualitative research for a number of reasons including the number of theories under which this type of research can be conducted and the subsequent incompatibility of indicators of quality. This paper presents a 10-point checklist for assessing the quality of qualitative research in clinical epidemiological studies. We aim to provide a framework for critical appraisal as well as offer direction for qualitative researchers in designing and publishing their work.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10885207     DOI: 10.1007/BF02820685

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Pediatr        ISSN: 0019-5456            Impact factor:   1.967


  3 in total

Review 1.  Qualitative research methods in general practice and primary care.

Authors:  N Britten; R Jones; E Murphy; R Stacy
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 2.267

2.  Interpreting and reporting qualitative research.

Authors:  K A Knafl; M J Howard
Journal:  Res Nurs Health       Date:  1984-03       Impact factor: 2.228

3.  Ten criteria for evaluating qualitative research proposals.

Authors:  A K Cobb; J N Hagemaster
Journal:  J Nurs Educ       Date:  1987-04       Impact factor: 1.726

  3 in total
  6 in total

1.  Diabetes in pregnancy among indigenous women in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States: a method for systematic review of studies with different designs.

Authors:  Catherine Chamberlain; Daniel Yore; Hang Li; Emily Williams; Brian Oldenburg; Jeremy Oats; Bridgette McNamara; Sandra Eades
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2011-12-23       Impact factor: 3.007

2.  Systematic mapping of existing tools to appraise methodological strengths and limitations of qualitative research: first stage in the development of the CAMELOT tool.

Authors:  Heather Menzies Munthe-Kaas; Claire Glenton; Andrew Booth; Jane Noyes; Simon Lewin
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2019-06-04       Impact factor: 4.615

3.  Perspectives of People Who Are Overweight and Obese on Using Wearable Technology for Weight Management: Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ruiqi Hu; Michelle Helena van Velthoven; Edward Meinert
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2020-01-13       Impact factor: 4.773

Review 4.  Threats and Interventions on Wellbeing in Asylum Seekers in the Netherlands: A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Ferdy Pluck; Roelof Ettema; Eric Vermetten
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 5.435

Review 5.  Diabetes in pregnancy among indigenous women in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States.

Authors:  Catherine Chamberlain; Bridgette McNamara; Emily D Williams; Daniel Yore; Brian Oldenburg; Jeremy Oats; Sandra Eades
Journal:  Diabetes Metab Res Rev       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 4.876

6.  Engaging with and Shaping Nature: A Nature-Based Intervention for Those with Mental Health and Behavioural Problems at the Westonbirt Arboretum in England.

Authors:  Liz O'Brien
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2018-10-10       Impact factor: 3.390

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.