| Literature DB >> 30922220 |
Kate Roberts1, Anthony Dowell2, Jing-Bao Nie3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Navigating the world of qualitative thematic analysis can be challenging. This is compounded by the fact that detailed descriptions of methods are often omitted from qualitative discussions. While qualitative research methodologies are now mature, there often remains a lack of fine detail in their description both at submitted peer reviewed article level and in textbooks. As one of research's aims is to determine the relationship between knowledge and practice through the demonstration of rigour, more detailed descriptions of methods could prove useful. Rigour in quantitative research is often determined through detailed explanation allowing replication, but the ability to replicate is often not considered appropriate in qualitative research. However, a well described qualitative methodology could demonstrate and ensure the same effect.Entities:
Keywords: Codebook; Coding; Qualitative research; Rigour; Thematic analysis
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30922220 PMCID: PMC6437927 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-019-0707-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol ISSN: 1471-2288 Impact factor: 4.615
Fig. 1- Process of code creation and testing
Example of a code definition form the code book
| Code Label | Definition | Description | Qualifications or exclusions | Examples |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fear of rejection | Demonstrating anxiety about being cut-off demeaned or isolated. Fear of experiencing hurt, pain or embarrassment due to others’ actions or words | Perceptions of each other based on beliefs or self-held doubts, unfounded opinions, rushing to an opinion without reason. | Can be fear of patient or practitioner being ridiculed - with or without basis |
|
| Feelings of inferiority | Expressing a sense of division within a group of people. | Mention of power imbalance, being treated/acting differently, not feeling the ‘same’, differing world views | Expressed as feelings between clinicians rather than between patients. |
|
Example of table used for absence/presence reliability
| Subtheme/Code | Description | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The role of research. | Mention of how research might inform decisions. Does research impact on relationships with each other? Purpose of research in practice. | |||||
| Demonstrating competency | Discussion of what would display competence, what would enable development of trust between practitioners. | |||||
| Science vs philosophy when defining acupuncture | Discussion of differing styles of acupuncture training and/or practice. Mention of either specifics of the western or eastern framework. | |||||
| Subtheme/code | Coder 1 KR | Coder 2 TD | Coder 3 JN | |||
| Absent | Present | Absent | Present | Absent | Present | |
| The role of research | Yes | Yes | Yes | |||
| Demonstrating competency | Yes | Yes – first | Yes | |||
| Science vs philosophy when defining acupuncture | Yes | Yes - Line 50, 78, 288 | Yes | |||
Reliability = 6/6 + 0 = 1 High agreement
Testing Absence/presence of multiple sub-themes/codes within a single interview Notes for coders- This is a reliability test for coding. Within these single interviews, please record whether the following codes/nodes are absent or present in the interview
Example of table used for inter-rater reliability
| Participant | Coder 1 KR | Coder 2 TD | Coder 3 JN |
|---|---|---|---|
| ACU001 | 5 | 7 | 4 |
| GP003 | 9 | 6 | 2 |
Reliability = 23/23 + 10 = .7 – Inadequate agreement reached
Testing frequency of observation of theme ‘research versus relationships’ – subtheme/code ‘the role of research’ in a subset of two interviews Notes for coders - This is a reliability test for coding to assist with the demonstration of rigour within the data analysis. Within these two interviews, please record the number of times you would code text at ‘the role of research’ node. This relates to the category of defining current practice/research versus relationships/the role of research. Coding guide - Mention of how research might inform decisions. Does research impact on relationships with each other? Purpose of research in practice