Application of four-dimension criteria to assess rigour of qualitative research in emergency medicine
Application of four-dimension criteria to assess rigour of qualitative research in emergency medicine
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12913-018-2915-2
复制
发表时间：
2018-02-17
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Aboagye-Sarfo, Patrick
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Forero, Roberto;Nahidi, Shizar;Aboagye-Sarfo, Patrick
背景：这篇方法论手稿的主要目的是说明在紧急情况下使用定性研究的作用。我们概述了用于评估澳大利亚急诊科工作人员的感知和经验的定性研究的严格标准。方法：我们使用整合的混合方法框架来确定急诊科工作人员在实施时间目标政府政策期间的不同观点和经验。这项定性研究包括对16家医院的119名参与者的采访。访谈在2015-2016年间进行，数据采用NVivo Version 11进行管理。我们分三个阶段进行分析，即：概念框架、比较对比和假设开发。最后，我们实施了四个维度的标准(可信度、可信度、可确认性和可转移性)来评估研究的稳健性，结果：我们采用了四个维度的标准来评估急诊科背景下大规模定性研究的严谨性。研究标准包括建立研究团队；准备数据收集指南；定义和获得足够的参与；达到数据饱和并确保高水平的一致性和编码者间的一致。结论：根据研究结果，提出的框架满足四个维度的标准，并产生了潜在的定性研究应用于急诊医学研究。我们为正在进行的关于定性研究的严谨性的辩论增加了方法论上的贡献，我们希望这将指导急救研究中这一主题的未来研究。它还为今后开展混合方法研究提供了建议。关于这一系列的未来论文将使用定性数据的结果和纵向数据联系的实证结果来进一步确定与教育绩效相关的因素；它们将单独报告。
Background: The main objective of this methodological manuscript was to illustrate the role of using qualitative research in emergency settings. We outline rigorous criteria applied to a qualitative study assessing perceptions and experiences of staff working in Australian emergency departments.Methods: We used an integrated mixed-methodology framework to identify different perspectives and experiences of emergency department staff during the implementation of a time target government policy. The qualitative study comprised interviews from 119 participants across 16 hospitals. The interviews were conducted in 2015-2016 and the data were managed using NVivo version 11. We conducted the analysis in three stages, namely: conceptual framework, comparison and contrast and hypothesis development. We concluded with the implementation of the four-dimension criteria (credibility, dependability, confirmability and transferability) to assess the robustness of the study,Results: We adapted four-dimension criteria to assess the rigour of a large-scale qualitative research in the emergency department context. The criteria comprised strategies such as building the research team; preparing data collection guidelines; defining and obtaining adequate participation; reaching data saturation and ensuring high levels of consistency and inter-coder agreement.Conclusion: Based on the findings, the proposed framework satisfied the four-dimension criteria and generated potential qualitative research applications to emergency medicine research. We have added a methodological contribution to the ongoing debate about rigour in qualitative research which we hope will guide future studies in this topic in emergency care research. It also provided recommendations for conducting future mixed-methods studies. Future papers on this series will use the results from qualitative data and the empirical findings from longitudinal data linkage to further identify factors associated with ED performance; they will be reported separately.