Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, University of Heidelberg Hospital, INF 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 Dec 10;20(1):301. doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-01186-6.
Qualitative methods offer a unique contribution to health research. Academic dissertations in the medical field provide an opportunity to explore research practice. Our aim was to assess the use of qualitative methods in dissertations in the medical field.
By means of a methodological observational study, an analysis of all academic medical dissertations' abstracts between 1998 and 2018 in a repository databank of a large medical university faculty in Germany was performed. This included MD dissertations (Dr. med. (dent.)) and medical science dissertations (Dr. sc. hum.). All abstracts including "qualitativ*" were screened for studies using qualitative research methods. Data were extracted from abstracts using a category grid considering a) general characteristics (year, language, degree type), b) discipline, c) study design (mixed methods/qualitative only, data conduction, data analysis), d) sample (size and participants) and e) technologies used (data analysis software and recording technology). Thereby reporting quality was assessed.
In total, 103 abstracts of medical dissertations between 1998 and 2018 (1.4% of N = 7619) were included, 60 of MD dissertations and 43 of medical sciences dissertations. Half of the abstracts (n = 51) referred to dissertations submitted since 2014. Most abstracts related to public health/hygiene (n = 27) and general practice (n = 26), followed by medical psychology (n = 19). About half of the studies (n = 47) used qualitative research methods exclusively, the other half (n = 56) used mixed methods. For data collection, primarily individual interviews were used (n = 80), followed by group interviews (n = 33) and direct observation (n = 11). Patients (n = 36), physicians (n = 36) and healthcare professionals (n = 17) were the most frequent research participants. Incomplete reporting of participants and data analysis was common (n = 67). Nearly half of the abstracts (n = 46) lacked information on how data was analysed, most of the remaining (n = 43) used some form of content analysis. In summary, 36 abstracts provided all crucial data (participants, sample size,; data collection and analysis method).
A small number of academic dissertations used qualitative research methods. About a third of these reported all key aspects of the methods used in the abstracts. Further research on the quality of choice and reporting of methods for qualitative research in dissertations is recommended.
定性方法为健康研究做出了独特的贡献。医学领域的学术论文为探索研究实践提供了机会。我们的目的是评估医学领域论文中定性方法的使用情况。
通过方法学观察研究,对德国一所大型医学大学教师资料库中 1998 年至 2018 年期间所有医学博士论文(医学博士(牙医))和医学科学论文(医学博士)的论文摘要进行了分析。所有包含“定性”的摘要都被筛选出使用定性研究方法的研究。使用类别网格从摘要中提取数据,考虑以下方面:a)一般特征(年份、语言、学位类型),b)学科,c)研究设计(混合方法/定性研究、数据收集、数据分析),d)样本(大小和参与者)和 e)使用的技术(数据分析软件和记录技术)。从而评估报告质量。
共纳入 1998 年至 2018 年期间的 103 篇医学论文摘要(7619 篇论文的 1.4%),其中 60 篇为医学博士论文,43 篇为医学科学论文。一半的摘要(n=51)涉及自 2014 年以来提交的论文。大多数摘要涉及公共卫生/卫生学(n=27)和普通科(n=26),其次是医学心理学(n=19)。大约一半的研究(n=47)仅使用定性研究方法,另一半(n=56)使用混合方法。数据收集主要使用个人访谈(n=80),其次是小组访谈(n=33)和直接观察(n=11)。患者(n=36)、医生(n=36)和医疗保健专业人员(n=17)是最常见的研究参与者。参与者和数据分析的不完整报告很常见(n=67)。近一半的摘要(n=46)没有提供关于如何分析数据的信息,其余大部分(n=43)使用某种形式的内容分析。总的来说,36 篇摘要提供了所有关键数据(参与者、样本量、数据收集和分析方法)。
少数学术论文使用了定性研究方法。其中约三分之一的论文在摘要中报告了所用方法的所有关键方面。建议对论文中定性研究方法的选择和报告质量进行进一步研究。