Faculty of Pharmacy, Beirut Arab University, P.O. Box: 11, 5020, Beirut, Lebanon.
Department of Pharmacy, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, Building: 17-5-504, 2100, København Ø, Denmark.
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2020 Oct;16(10):1472-1482. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2020.02.005. Epub 2020 Feb 11.
Spurred by the value it can add, the use of qualitative research methods has been steadily growing by social pharmacy researchers around the globe, either separately or as part of mixed methods research projects. Given this increase, it is important to provide guidance to assist researchers in ensuring quality when employing such methods. This commentary addresses both theoretical fundamentals as well as practical aspects of establishing quality in qualitative social pharmacy research. More specifically, it provides an explanation of each of the criteria of trustworthiness proposed by Lincoln and Guba (credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability) and different techniques used in establishing them. It also provides a brief overview of authenticity, a more recent and less widely used set of criteria that involve demonstrating fairness, ontological authenticity, educative authenticity, catalytic authenticity, and tactical authenticity. For each of these terms, the commentary provides a definition, how it applies to social pharmacy research, and guidance on when and how to use them. These are accompanied by examples from the pharmacy literature where the criteria have been used. The commentary ends by providing a summary of competing viewpoints of establishing quality in the published literature while inviting the reader to reflect on how the presented criteria would apply to different qualitative research projects.
受其价值的推动，全球社会药学研究人员越来越多地使用定性研究方法，无论是单独使用还是作为混合方法研究项目的一部分。鉴于这种增长，为了帮助研究人员在使用这些方法时确保质量，提供指导非常重要。本评论既涉及理论基础，也涉及定性社会药学研究中建立质量的实际方面。更具体地说，它解释了 Lincoln 和 Guba（可信度、可转移性、可靠性和可确认性）提出的每一个可信性标准，以及用于建立这些标准的不同技术。它还简要概述了真实性，这是一个更新颖但使用范围更广的标准集，涉及展示公平性、本体真实性、教育真实性、催化真实性和策略真实性。对于这些术语中的每一个，评论都提供了定义、它在社会药学研究中的应用，以及何时以及如何使用它们的指导。这些术语还附有来自药学文献中的示例，其中使用了这些标准。评论最后总结了发表文献中关于建立质量的有争议的观点，同时邀请读者思考所提出的标准将如何适用于不同的定性研究项目。
