通过将定性研究与随机对照试验相结合获取附加价值：一项定性访谈研究。
Getting added value from using qualitative research with randomized controlled trials: a qualitative interview study.
作者信息
O'Cathain Alicia, Goode Jackie, Drabble Sarah J, Thomas Kate J, Rudolph Anne, Hewison Jenny
机构信息
Health Services Research, Medical Care Research Unit, School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Regent Street, Sheffield S1 4DA, UK.
出版信息
Trials. 2014 Jun 9;15:215. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-215.
BACKGROUND
Qualitative research is undertaken with randomized controlled trials of health interventions. Our aim was to explore the perceptions of researchers with experience of this endeavour to understand the added value of qualitative research to the trial in practice.
METHODS
A telephone semi-structured interview study with 18 researchers with experience of undertaking the trial and/or the qualitative research.
RESULTS
Interviewees described the added value of qualitative research for the trial, explaining how it solved problems at the pretrial stage, explained findings, and helped to increase the utility of the evidence generated by the trial. From the interviews, we identified three models of relationship of the qualitative research to the trial. In 'the peripheral' model, the trial was an opportunity to undertake qualitative research, with no intention that it would add value to the trial. In 'the add-on' model, the qualitative researcher understood the potential value of the qualitative research but it was viewed as a separate and complementary endeavour by the trial lead investigator and wider team. Interviewees described how this could limit the value of the qualitative research to the trial. Finally 'the integral' model played out in two ways. In 'integral-in-theory' studies, the lead investigator viewed the qualitative research as essential to the trial. However, in practice the qualitative research was under-resourced relative to the trial, potentially limiting its ability to add value to the trial. In 'integral-in-practice' studies, interviewees described how the qualitative research was planned from the beginning of the study, senior qualitative expertise was on the team from beginning to end, and staff and time were dedicated to the qualitative research. In these studies interviewees described the qualitative research adding value to the trial although this value was not necessarily visible beyond the original research team due to the challenges of publishing this research.
CONCLUSIONS
Health researchers combining qualitative research and trials viewed this practice as strengthening evaluative research. Teams viewing the qualitative research as essential to the trial, and resourcing it in practice, may have a better chance of delivering its added value to the trial.
背景
定性研究与健康干预的随机对照试验同时进行。我们的目的是探讨有此类研究经验的研究人员的看法，以了解定性研究在实际试验中的附加价值。
方法
对18名有进行试验和/或定性研究经验的研究人员进行电话半结构化访谈研究。
结果
受访者描述了定性研究对试验的附加价值，解释了它如何在试验前阶段解决问题、解释研究结果，并有助于提高试验所产生证据的效用。通过访谈，我们确定了定性研究与试验关系的三种模式。在“边缘”模式中，试验是进行定性研究的机会，无意让其为试验增加价值。在“附加”模式中，定性研究人员理解定性研究的潜在价值，但试验首席研究员和更广泛的团队将其视为一项单独的补充性工作。受访者描述了这如何可能限制定性研究对试验的价值。最后，“整体”模式以两种方式呈现。在“理论上的整体”研究中，首席研究员认为定性研究对试验至关重要。然而，在实践中，相对于试验，定性研究的资源不足，这可能限制了其为试验增加价值的能力。在“实践中的整体”研究中，受访者描述了定性研究如何从研究开始就进行规划，高级定性研究专业知识自始至终都在团队中，并且人员和时间都专门用于定性研究。在这些研究中，受访者描述定性研究为试验增加了价值，尽管由于发表此项研究面临挑战，这种价值不一定能在原研究团队之外显现出来。
结论
将定性研究与试验相结合的健康研究人员认为这种做法加强了评估性研究。将定性研究视为试验必不可少的一部分并在实践中为其提供资源的团队，可能更有机会为试验实现其附加价值。
Zotero 插件