Literature DB >> 11489018

'Best research practice': in pursuit of methodological rigour.

F Maggs-Rapport1.   

Abstract

RATIONALE: This paper is based on the rationale that misuse of methodological notions in research publications lays research studies open to criticism and dismissal. AIM: In search of 'best research practice', this paper aims to examine the different qualities of four major qualitative methodologies: ethnography, descriptive phenomenology, interpretative phenomenology/hermeneutics and critical social theory.
DESIGN: The study presents a critical overview of methodological decision-making, illustrating the sorts of issues researchers must consider in order to justify to the readership and to themselves the employment of a particular methodology. This is presented alongside a general overview of qualitative research and a précis of each of the major qualitative methodologies. The paper describes the methodologies, salient features, and examines methodological similarities and differences. The paper concludes by examining the need for methodological rigour within the framework of the National Health Service (NHS) Executive's drive for evidence-based practice in health care. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is hoped that the paper will stimulate a deeper exploration of methodological rigour in future research publications.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11489018     DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01853.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Adv Nurs        ISSN: 0309-2402            Impact factor:   3.187


  3 in total

1.  Identification of outliers and positive deviants for healthcare improvement: looking for high performers in hypoglycemia safety in patients with diabetes.

Authors:  Brigid Wilson; Chin-Lin Tseng; Orysya Soroka; Leonard M Pogach; David C Aron
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-11-16       Impact factor: 2.655

2.  Can learning about trials be child's play? A qualitative exploration of the 'Schools Teaching Awareness of Randomised Trials' (START) initiative.

Authors:  Linda Biesty; Sandra Galvin; Elaine Finucane; Patricia Healy; Declan Devane; Tom Conway
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 3.  A systematic review of the content of critical appraisal tools.

Authors:  Persis Katrak; Andrea E Bialocerkowski; Nicola Massy-Westropp; Saravana Kumar; Karen A Grimmer
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2004-09-16       Impact factor: 4.615

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.