Peditto Kathryn
1 Department of Design and Environmental Analysis, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.
HERD. 2018 Apr;11(2):16-19. doi: 10.1177/1937586718772615. Epub 2018 May 9.
This Methods column describes the existing reporting standards for qualitative research, their application to health design research, and the challenges to implementation. Intended for both researchers and practitioners, this article provides multiple perspectives on both reporting and evaluating high-quality qualitative research.
Two popular reporting standards exist for reporting qualitative research-the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) and the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR). Though compiled using similar procedures, they differ in their criteria and the methods to which they apply. Creating and applying reporting criteria is inherently difficult due to the undefined and fluctuating nature of qualitative research when compared to quantitative studies.
Qualitative research is expansive and occasionally controversial, spanning many different methods of inquiry and epistemological approaches. A "one-size-fits-all" standard for reporting qualitative research can be restrictive, but COREQ and SRQR both serve as valuable tools for developing responsible qualitative research proposals, effectively communicating research decisions, and evaluating submissions. Ultimately, tailoring a set of standards specific to health design research and its frequently used methods would ensure quality research and aid reviewers in their evaluations.
本方法专栏介绍了定性研究的现有报告标准、其在健康设计研究中的应用以及实施过程中面临的挑战。本文面向研究人员和从业者，从报告和评估高质量定性研究的多个角度进行阐述。
目前存在两种用于报告定性研究的流行报告标准——《定性研究报告统一标准》（COREQ）和《定性研究报告标准》（SRQR）。尽管它们采用了相似的编制程序，但在标准及其适用方法上存在差异。与定量研究相比，由于定性研究的性质不明确且波动较大，制定和应用报告标准本身就很困难。
定性研究范围广泛，有时存在争议，涵盖许多不同的探究方法和认识论方法。“一刀切”的定性研究报告标准可能具有局限性，但 COREQ 和 SRQR 都是制定负责任的定性研究方案、有效传达研究决策以及评估投稿的宝贵工具。最终，制定一套针对健康设计研究及其常用方法的特定标准将确保研究质量，并帮助评审人员进行评估。
