Commentary: Writing and Evaluating Qualitative Research Reports.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Wu YP
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4888120 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Commentary: Writing and Evaluating Qualitative Research Reports.
Wu Yelena P YP Thompson Deborah D Aroian Karen J KJ McQuaid Elizabeth L EL Deatrick Janet A JA
Journal of pediatric psychology 20160426 5
<h4>Objective</h4>To provide an overview of qualitative methods, particularly for reviewers and authors who may be less familiar with qualitative research.<h4>Methods</h4>A question and answer format is used to address considerations for writing and evaluating qualitative research.<h4>Results and conclusions</h4>When producing qualitative research, individuals are encouraged to address the qualitative research considerations raised and to explicitly identify the systematic strategies used to ens ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundHealth research capacity strengthening (RCS) projects are often complex and hard to evaluate. In order to inform health RCS evaluation efforts, we aimed to describe and compare key characteristics of existing health RCS evaluation frameworks: their process of development, purpose, target users, structure, content and coverage of important evaluation issues. A secondary objective was to explore what use had been made of the ESSENCE framework, which attempts to address one such issue: harmonising the evaluation requirements of different funders.MethodsWe identified and analysed health RCS evaluation frameworks published by seven funding agencies between 2004 and 2012, using a mixed methods approach involving structured qualitative analyses of documents, a stakeholder survey and consultations with key contacts in health RCS funding agencies.ResultsThe frameworks were intended for use predominantly by the organisations themselves, and most were oriented primarily towards funders' internal organisational performance requirements. The frameworks made limited reference to theories that specifically concern RCS. Generic devices, such as logical frameworks, were typically used to document activities, outputs and outcomes, but with little emphasis on exploring underlying assumptions or contextual constraints. Usage of the ESSENCE framework appeared limited.ConclusionsWe believe that there is scope for improving frameworks through the incorporation of more accessible information about how to do evaluation in practice; greater involvement of stakeholders, following evaluation capacity building principles; greater emphasis on explaining underlying rationales of frameworks; and structuring frameworks so that they separate generic and project-specific aspects of health RCS evaluation. The third and fourth of these improvements might assist harmonisation.
| S-EPMC3878679 | biostudies-literature
Project description:For attaining success in writing, motivation is essential. Crucially, instruction is dependent on knowing the student’s capabilities and inner drives. To date, research on writing has yet to establish a consistent framework for assessing writing motivation, and often fails to acknowledge students’ self-reports, rather favoring evaluations of students’ writing motivation made by others, such as teachers and researchers. This limbo state originates partly from a general skepticism towards the trustworthiness of elementary students’ self-reports. Nonetheless, the validity of such self-reports has been acknowledged in adjacent fields, such as reading. Aiming to establish a knowledge base from studies addressing students’ voices, the present study adopts the method of a systematic review and investigates how writing motivation has been assessed in empirical studies (1996–2020) through K-5 students’ self-reports. Of the 7047 studies identified through database search, 56 met the inclusion criteria and are examined in this review. Results indicate that (a) storytelling is the genre most used to operationalize writing in the investigations, (b) surveys and interview questions measuring students’ attitude towards writing are the most common type of self-report used, and (c) students’ voices are weighted differently across the studies. Findings suggest that future research should (1) work to counteract existing biases in writing tasks, (2) provide a rationale for their choice/design of measure of motivation, and (3) report clearly whose voices are being heard (e.g., students’, teachers’, or researchers’) and the appropriateness of this choice regarding study purpose, design, and findings. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10648-023-09732-6.
| S-EPMC9947433 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Considerable advances have been made in the field of infant feeding research. The last few decades have witnessed the expansion in the number of studies on the composition and benefits of human milk. The practice of breastfeeding and use of human milk represent today's reference standards for infant feeding and nutrition. Additional research regarding the benefits of breastfeeding is needed to determine which factors in human milk and in the act of breastfeeding itself, singly or in combination, are most important for producing the beneficial effects on infant growth, body composition, and neurodevelopmental outcome. We examine evidence that breastfeeding confers health benefits and offer suggestions on how best to interpret the data and present it to the public. We also describe some examples of well-designed infant nutrition studies that provide useful and clinically meaningful data regarding infant feeding, growth, and development. Because not all mothers choose to breastfeed or can breastfeed, other appropriate feeding options should be subjected to critical review to help establish how infant formula and bottle feeding can confer benefits similar to those of human milk and the act of breastfeeding. We conclude with the overarching point that the goal of infant feeding research is to promote optimal infant growth and development. Since parents/families may take different paths to feeding their infants, it is fundamental that health professionals understand how best to interpret research studies and their findings to support optimal infant growth and development.
| S-EPMC4840881 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundPerforming a psychiatric interview and documenting the recorded findings in the form of a brief psychiatric report is one of the main learning goals in the psychiatric curriculum for medical students. However, observing and assessing students' reports is time consuming and there are no objective assessment tools at hand. Thus, we applied an integrative approach for designing a checklist that evaluates clinical performance, as a tool for the assessment of a psychiatric report.MethodsA systematic review of the literature yielded no objective instrument for assessing the quality of written reports of psychiatric interviews. We used a 4-step mixed-methods approach to design a checklist as an assessment tool for psychiatric reports: 1. Development of a draft checklist, using literature research and focus group interviews; 2. Pilot testing and subsequent group discussion about modifications resulting from the pilot testing; 3. Creating a scoring system; 4. Testing for interrater-reliability, internal consistency and validity.ResultsThe final checklist consisted of 36 items with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.833. Selectivity of items ranged between 0.080 and 0.796. After rater-training, an interrater-reliability of 0.96 (ICC) was achieved.ConclusionsOur approach, which integrated published evidence and the knowledge of domain experts, resulted in a reliable and valid checklist. It offers an objective instrument to measure the ability to document psychiatric interviews. It facilitates a transparent assessment of students' learning goals with the goal of structural alignment of learning goals and assessment. We discuss ways it may additionally be used to measure the ability to perform a psychiatric interview and supplement other assessment formats.
| S-EPMC6498494 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) infections are challenging to treat and associated with poor clinical outcomes. In this issue, sulbactam-durlobactam, a novel β-lactam-β-lactamase inhibitor, was used with cefiderocol to successfully treat CRAB pneumonia. While this report and in vitro data are encouraging, determining the impact of treatment regimens on clinical outcomes after CRAB infections is not straightforward. Therefore, careful evaluation in pathogen-directed randomized controlled trials is needed to determine the optimal treatment of CRAB infections.
| S-EPMC8522720 | biostudies-literature
Project description:L2 writing in the disciplines at the university level can be impacted through classroom intervention which uses mixed pedagogical paradigms. In connection to such intervention, this data article presents two datasets, from a classroom practice, which evidence disciplinary writing acquisition. The first dataset consists of pre-and post-classroom intervention abstracts, written by L2 PhD students from different disciplines at a Sino-British University. The second dataset is made up of qualitative questionnaire responses from the students about their experiences of the classroom intervention. The datasets can be used to understand the nature of discourse-structural and linguistic feature changes which take place after pedagogical intervention involving mature learners from mixed disciplines. The data can also provide insight into the impact of classroom teaching approaches on the construction and communication of knowledge by novice writers in their disciplines.
| S-EPMC6661450 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn dentistry, the reporting of panoramic radiographs is particularly challenging, as many structures are depicted in one image and pathologies need to be identified completely. To enhance the learning process for these interpretations, the advantages of the increasingly popular education method of mobile learning could be used. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the effectiveness of learning to report panoramic radiographs using an application (app) on a mobile device.MethodsThe existing e-learning programme 'PantoDict' was further developed into a mobile app with a new training section. Participants of a dental radiology course were divided into two groups, one of which additionally had the chance to practise reporting panoramic radiographs using the app. A test to assess the knowledge gained was conducted at the end of the semester; the course and the app were also evaluated.ResultsThe group that used the app showed significantly better results in the test than the control group (p < 0.05). Although the app group approved a high satisfaction using the app as an additional supplement to the course, this did not result in a higher overall satisfaction with the course. Further, these students observed that the traditional face-to-face seminar could not be replaced by the app.ConclusionBy using the PantoDict app, students were offered better training options for writing reports on panoramic radiographs, which resulted in significantly better test results than the results of the control group. Therefore, the mobile app is a useful supplement to classical education formats within the context of a blended learning approach.
| S-EPMC8411548 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Global migration from Africa to more economically developed regions such as the United States, Europe, the Middle East, and Australia has reached unprecedented rates in the past five decades. The size of the African immigrant population in the United States has roughly doubled every decade since 1970. However, research has not kept up with the growing size of this vulnerable population. Data from African immigrants have not traditionally been reported separately from Blacks/African Americans. There is growing interest in increasing the participation of African immigrants in research to understand their unique health needs and the full spectrum of factors impacting their health, ranging from racial, social, environmental, and behavioral factors, to individual biological and genetic factors which may also inform health challenges. This line of inquiry may also inform our understanding of health disparities among their African American counterparts. However, little is known about effective community engagement and recruitment strategies that may increase the participation of this population in research studies. The purpose of this commentary is to: 1) describe lessons learned from our experiences engaging African immigrants in research in the Baltimore, Washington, DC, and Atlanta metropolitan areas; 2) discuss strategies for successful recruitment; and 3) consider future directions of research and opportunities to translate research findings into health policy for this population.
| S-EPMC6802169 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We read with considerable interest the study by Gusenbauer and Haddaway (Gusenbauer and Haddaway, 2020, Research Synthesis Methods, doi:10.1002/jrsm.1378) comparing the systematic search qualities of 28 search systems, including Google Scholar (GS) and PubMed. Google Scholar and PubMed are the two most popular free academic search tools in biology and chemistry, with GS being the number one search tool in the world. Those academics using GS as their principal system for literature searches may be unaware of research which enumerates five critical features for scientific literature tools that greatly influenced Gusenbauer's 2020 study. Using this list as the framework for a targeted comparison between just GS and PubMed, we found stark differences which overwhelmingly favored PubMed. In this comment, we show that by comparing the characteristics of the two search tools, features that are particularly useful in one search tool, but are missing in the other, are strikingly spotlighted. One especially popular feature that ubiquitously appears in GS, but not in PubMed, is the forward citation search found under every citation as a clickable Cited by N link. We seek to improve the PubMed search experience using two approaches. First, we request that PubMed add Cited by N links, making them as omnipresent as the GS links. Second, we created an open-source command-line tool, pmidcite, which is used alongside PubMed to give information to researchers to help with the choice of the next paper to examine, analogous to how GS's Cited by N links help to guide users. Find pmidcite at https://github.com/dvklopfenstein/pmidcite.
| S-EPMC7984402 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) is obligated to peer review and to post publicly "Final Research Reports" of all funded projects. PCORI peer review emphasizes adherence to PCORI's Methodology Standards and principles of ethical scientific communication. During the peer review process, reviewers and editors seek to ensure that results are presented objectively and interpreted appropriately, e.g., free of spin.MethodsTwo independent raters assessed PCORI peer review feedback sent to authors. We calculated the proportion of reports in which spin was identified during peer review, and the types of spin identified. We included reports submitted by April 2018 with at least one associated journal article. The same raters then assessed whether authors addressed reviewers' comments about spin. The raters also assessed whether spin identified during PCORI peer review was present in related journal articles.ResultsWe included 64 PCORI-funded projects. Peer reviewers or editors identified spin in 55/64 (86%) submitted research reports. Types of spin included reporting bias (46/55; 84%), inappropriate interpretation (40/55; 73%), inappropriate extrapolation of results (15/55; 27%), and inappropriate attribution of causality (5/55; 9%). Authors addressed comments about spin related to 47/55 (85%) of the reports. Of 110 associated journal articles, PCORI comments about spin were potentially applicable to 44/110 (40%) articles, of which 27/44 (61%) contained the same spin that was identified in the PCORI research report. The proportion of articles with spin was similar for articles accepted before and after PCORI peer review (63% vs 58%).DiscussionJust as spin is common in journal articles and press releases, we found that most reports submitted to PCORI included spin. While most spin was mitigated during the funder's peer review process, we found no evidence that review of PCORI reports influenced spin in journal articles. Funders could explore interventions aimed at reducing spin in published articles of studies they support.
| S-EPMC8638354 | biostudies-literature