Enhancing rigor in qualitative description - A case study
Enhancing rigor in qualitative description - A case study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/00152192-200511000-00014
复制
发表时间：
2005-11-01
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Oberle, K
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Milne, J;Oberle, K
定性描述通常被视为更发达的定性方法（例如扎根理论）的“穷表弟”。因此，很少有关于定性描述的严谨性的文章，研究人员缺乏一个导航图来指导他们并促进决策。特别是新手，可能会面临许多挑战和不确定性。使用失禁项目作为案例研究，作者描述了定性描述性研究中出现的问题和用于保持严谨性的方法。这项研究的整体可信度取决于研究人员捕捉内部（主位）观点并准确表达该观点的能力。提高严谨性的策略包括灵活而系统的抽样，确保参与者有发言的自由，确保准确的转录和数据驱动的编码，以及对上下文的持续关注。
Qualitative description has generally been viewed as the "poor cousin" to more developed qualitative methods, such as grounded theory. As such, little has been written about rigor in qualitative description, and researchers lack a navigational map to guide them and facilitate decision making. The novice, in particular, can be faced with numerous challenges and uncertainties. Using an incontinence project as a case study, the authors describe the issues that arose within a qualitative descriptive study and approaches used to maintain rigor. The overall credibility of the study depended on the researcher's ability to capture an insider (emic) perspective and to represent that perspective accurately. Strategies to enhance rigor included flexible yet systematic sampling, ensuring participants had the freedom to speak, ensuring accurate transcription and data-driven coding, and on-going attention to context.