2. What is qualitative research?
Qualitative research is a type of scientific research.
In general terms, scientific research consists of an investigation that:
• seeks answers to a question
• systematically uses a predefined set of procedures to answer the
question
• collects evidence
• produces findings that were not determined in advance
• produces findings that are applicable
Additionally, qualitative research seeks to understand a given
research problem or topic from the perspectives of the local
population it involves.

3. What can we learn from qualitative
research?

Provides information about the “human” side of an issue –
that is, the often contradictory behaviors, beliefs, opinions,
emotions, and relationships of individuals.

Effective in identifying factors, such as social norms,
socioeconomic status, gender roles, ethnicity, and religion,
whose role in the research issue may not be readily apparent.

When used along with quantitative methods, qualitative
research can help us to interpret and better understand the
complex reality of a given situation and the implications of
quantitative data.

4. Qualitative Methods
Quantitative Methods
1.
1. Fixed response options
Unstructured or semi-structured
response options
2. No statistical tests
2. Statistical tests are used for analysis
3. Can be valid and reliable: largely
depends on skill and rigor of the
researcher
3. Can be valid and reliable: largely
depends on the measurement device or
instrument used
4. Time expenditure lighter on the
planning end and heavier during the
analysis phase
4. Time expenditure heavier on the
planning phase and lighter on the
analysis phase
5. Less generalizable
5. More generalizable

5. 
Is the research question posed in a manner that
resonate with the qualitative paradigm?

Are the Results Valid?

What Are the Results?

How Can I Apply the Results to Patient Care?

6. Example
How often do breast cancer patients use drug x to treat
their disease?
As compared to
What is the experience of breast cancer patients in the use
of drug x in the management of their disease?

7. Are the Results Valid?
 Was the choice of participants explicit and
comprehensive?
 Was data collection sufficiently comprehensive and
detailed?
 Were the data analyzed appropriately and the findings
corroborated adequately?
 Does the study adequately address potential ethical
issues, including reflexivity?

8. Was the choice of participants explicit
and comprehensive?

Readers of qualitative studies should look for sound
reasoning describing and justifying the participant
selection strategies.
1. Purposive sampling
2. Quota sampling
3. Snowball sampling

Sample size should be sufficient to achieve an
adequate breadth and depth of perspective.

9. Purposive sampling

Purposive sampling groups participants according to
preselected criteria relevant to a particular research question.

Sample sizes are often determined on the basis of theoretical
saturation

Theoretical saturation is the point in data collection when
new data no longer bring additional insights to the research
questions).

Most successful when data review and analysis are done in
conjunction with data collection.

10. Quota Sampling

In quota sampling, we decide while designing the study how
many people with which characteristics to include as
participants.

Then we go into the community and find people who fit these
criteria, until we meet the prescribed quotas.

Purposive and quota sampling are similar in that they both
seek to identify participants based on selected criteria.

However, quota sampling is more specific with respect to
sizes and proportions of subsamples, with subgroups chosen
to reflect corresponding proportions in the population.

11. Snowball sampling

Also known as chain referral sampling.

Participants or informants with whom contact has already
been made use their social networks to refer the researcher
to other people who could potentially participate in or
contribute to the study.

Often used to find and recruit “hidden populations,” that is,
groups not easily accessible to researchers through other
sampling strategies.

12.  The number of observations
 The duration of the study
 The diversity of data collection techniques
 The number of investigators
 The degree of investigator involvement
 All relevant people and situations should be captured.

13. Data Collection Techniques
 Field observation
- Direct/Indirect,
- Participant/non-participant
 Interviews
- Semi-structured/Structured
- Focus Group
- In-depth
 Document analysis

14. Direct vs. Indirect Field Observation
1. Direct observation by investigators themselves.
2. Indirect observation through audio or video recording.
Advantage of audio or video recording:
less intrusive methods of capturing data.
Drawbacks of audio or video recording :
 Recorders can occupy a social role and be experienced by
participants as partaking in "surveillance", thus influencing
participants' behavior.
 Recorders' observational powers are limited by their range of
operation.

15. 
Direct observations are categorized into non-participant &
participant observation.

Non-participant observation: the researcher stays relatively
uninvolved in the social interactions she observes.

Participant-observation: the researcher is acknowledged as a
part of the social setting, either as a researcher per se or as a
more directly involved actor (e.g., social worker, committee
member, etc.).

In both Participant non-participant observations, social setting
might inadvertently influence participants' behavior.

16. 
Semi-structured (most popular).
open-ended, respondent-led, very detailed, inductive

Structured approaches e.g. Questionnaire:
 Presuppose too much of what a respondent might say.
 Don’t allow them to relate their experience in their own
terms.
 Can impose researchers’ pre-conceived concepts.

In-depth interviews e.g. for personal experiences on sensitive
topics)

Focus groups e.g. for interpersonal dynamics and culture.

17. 
Analysis of documents such as charts, journals,
correspondence.

Counting specific content elements (e.g. particular
words)

Interpreting text (e.g. differences in meanings and
considering contexts)

18. Were the data analyzed appropriately and the
findings corroborated adequately?

Continuous process starting from data collection

Transcribed in textual format

Systematic – identify major recurrent themes; Sorted,
coded, organised into categories – ‘thematic framework’

Examine and chart themes –record and theorise emergent
trends & associations

Independent analysis

19. Were the data analyzed appropriately and the
findings corroborated adequately?
Member Checking (Respondent Validation) involves sharing
draft study findings with the participants, to inquire:

Whether their viewpoints were faithfully interpreted

Whether there are gross errors of fact

Whether the account makes sense to participants with
different perspectives.
Triangulation of findings: means that findings are corroborated
using multiple sources of information

20. 
Information triangulation
Key findings are corroborated using multiple sources of
information

Investigators triangulation
requires more than one investigator to collect and analyze
the raw data, such that the findings emerge through
consensus between investigators.

Theory triangulation
is a process whereby emergent findings are corroborated
with existing social science theories.

21. Does the study adequately address potential
ethical issues, including reflexivity?

Respect for persons

Informed consent (written/oral)

Autonomy

Confidentiality

Beneficence

Justice

Respect for communities

22. Reflexivity

Reflexivity: recognition of the influence a researcher brings
to the research process.

Reflexivity highlights potential power relationships between
the researcher and research participants that might shape
the data being collected.

Reflexivity acknowledges how a researcher’s gender, ethnic
background, profession, and social status influence the
choices made within the study, such as the research question
itself and the methods of data collection.

23. 
Results should provide enough descriptive details to
evoke a vivid picture of a social setting or
interactions studied

Key findings should be illustrated with data excerpts

24. How can I apply the results to
patient care?

Can I transfer the results of this study to my own
setting? Generalizability / Transferability

Will the results of this study help me care for
patients?

25. Can I transfer the results of this
study to my own setting?

Though the study should discuss the extent of the findings’ resonance with
the published literature, much of the burden of assessing transferability is
left to readers.

The reader must decide if the setting of the study is sufficiently similar for
its results to be transferable to their own context.

Transferability may be helped by the study’s discussion of how its results
advance theoretical understandings that are relevant to multiple situations.
e.g. a study of patients’ preferences in palliative care may contribute to
theories of ethics and humanity in medicine, thus suggesting relevance to
other clinical situations such as the informed consent exchange before
treatment.

26. 
Does the study help me understand the context of
my practice?
Does the study provide a useful road map for readers to understand and
navigate similar social settings themselves?

Does the study help me understand my
relationships with patients and their families?
Does the research offer clinicians an understanding of roles, relationships
and communication among patients, families and caregivers?