Suppr超能文献

为什么开放式调查问题不太可能支持严谨的定性见解。

Why Open-Ended Survey Questions Are Unlikely to Support Rigorous Qualitative Insights.

机构信息

K.A. LaDonna is assistant professor, Department of Innovation in Medical Education and Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4738-0146. T. Taylor is assistant professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, and scientist, Centre for Education Research and Innovation, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada. L. Lingard is professor, Department of Medicine and Faculty of Education, and founding director and senior scientist, Centre for Education Research and Innovation, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

Acad Med. 2018 Mar;93(3):347-349. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002088.

Abstract

Health professions education researchers are increasingly relying on a combination of quantitative and qualitative research methods to explore complex questions in the field. This important and necessary development, however, creates new methodological challenges that can affect both the rigor of the research process and the quality of the findings. One example is "qualitatively" analyzing free-text responses to survey or assessment instrument questions. In this Invited Commentary, the authors explain why analysis of such responses rarely meets the bar for rigorous qualitative research. While the authors do not discount the potential for free-text responses to enhance quantitative findings or to inspire new research questions, they caution that these responses rarely produce data rich enough to generate robust, stand-alone insights. The authors consider exemplars from health professions education research and propose strategies for treating free-text responses appropriately.

摘要

健康职业教育研究人员越来越多地依赖于定量和定性研究方法的结合,以探索该领域的复杂问题。然而,这一重要且必要的发展带来了新的方法学挑战,这可能会影响研究过程的严谨性和研究结果的质量。一个例子是“定性地”分析对调查或评估工具问题的自由文本回复。在这篇特邀评论中,作者解释了为什么对这些回复的分析很少达到严格的定性研究的标准。虽然作者不否认自由文本回复有可能增强定量研究结果或激发新的研究问题,但他们警告说,这些回复很少产生足够丰富的数据来产生稳健的、独立的见解。作者考虑了健康职业教育研究中的范例,并提出了适当处理自由文本回复的策略。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验