A Content Analysis of 100 Qualitative Health Research Articles to Examine Researcher-Participant Relationships and Implications for Data Sharing

A Content Analysis of 100 Qualitative Health Research Articles to Examine Researcher-Participant Relationships and Implications for Data Sharing
复制标题

对 100 篇定性健康研究文章进行内容分析,以检验研究人员与参与者的关系以及数据共享的影响

DOI:
--
复制
发表时间:
2022
影响因子:
5.4
通讯作者:
J. DuBois
J. DuBois
中科院分区:
法学2区
文献类型:
--
作者:
J. Mozersky;Annie B. Friedrich;J. DuBois

文献摘要

参考文献

被引文献

相似文献

我们对涉及定性访谈或焦点小组的健康科学文献(N = 100)进行了定性内容分析。鉴于最近的数据共享任务,我们的目标是描述研究人员和参与者之间关系的性质,以告知有关定性数据共享和二次分析的伦理审议。具体来说,一些研究人员担心数据共享可能会损害关系,而另一些人则声称,如果没有与参与者的有意义的关系,就无法分析数据。我们几乎没有发现与参与者建立关系的证据。大多数研究涉及单次接触(95%),持续时间不到60分钟(59%),只有不到一半的作者参与了原始数据收集。我们的研究结果表明,与参与者的关系可能不会对共享健康科学中收集的一些定性数据构成障碍,并在原则上说明了对这些数据进行二次分析的可行性。
We conducted a qualitative content analysis of health science literature (N = 100) involving qualitative interviews or focus groups. Given recent data sharing mandates, our goal was to characterize the nature of relationships between the researchers and participants to inform ethical deliberations regarding qualitative data sharing and secondary analyses. Specifically, some researchers worry that data sharing might harm relationships, while others claim that data cannot be analyzed absent meaningful relationships with participants. We found little evidence of relationship building with participants. The majority of studies involve single encounters (95%), lasting less than 60 min (59%), with less than half of authors involved in primary data collection. Our findings suggest that relationships with participants might not pose a barrier to sharing some qualitative data collected in the health sciences and speak to the feasibility in principle of secondary analyses of these data.
从数据存档到道德迷宫
DOI: 10.1177/1468794109105032
发表时间: 2009
影响因子: 3.6
作者:
Carusi A
通讯作者: Carusi A