Heidelberg Institute of Global Health, Ruprechts-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Research Institute for Tropical Medicine, Department of Health, Manila, Philippines.
BMJ Glob Health. 2021 Jan;6(1). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-004193.
In-person interactions have traditionally been the gold standard for qualitative data collection. The COVID-19 pandemic required researchers to consider if remote data collection can meet research objectives, while retaining the same level of data quality and participant protections. We use four case studies from the Philippines, Zambia, India and Uganda to assess the challenges and opportunities of remote data collection during COVID-19. We present lessons learned that may inform practice in similar settings, as well as reflections for the field of qualitative inquiry in the post-COVID-19 era. Key challenges and strategies to overcome them included the need for adapted researcher training in the use of technologies and consent procedures, preparation for abbreviated interviews due to connectivity concerns, and the adoption of regular researcher debriefings. Participant outreach to allay suspicions ranged from communicating study information through multiple channels to highlighting associations with local institutions to boost credibility. Interviews were largely successful, and contained a meaningful level of depth, nuance and conviction that allowed teams to meet study objectives. Rapport still benefitted from conventional interviewer skills, including attentiveness and fluency with interview guides. While differently abled populations may encounter different barriers, the included case studies, which varied in geography and aims, all experienced more rapid recruitment and robust enrollment. Reduced in-person travel lowered interview costs and increased participation among groups who may not have otherwise attended. In our view, remote data collection is not a replacement for in-person endeavours, but a highly beneficial complement. It may increase accessibility and equity in participant contributions and lower costs, while maintaining rich data collection in multiple study target populations and settings.
面对面的互动一直是定性数据收集的黄金标准。COVID-19 大流行要求研究人员考虑远程数据收集是否可以达到研究目标，同时保持相同的数据质量和参与者保护水平。我们使用来自菲律宾、赞比亚、印度和乌干达的四个案例研究来评估 COVID-19 期间远程数据收集的挑战和机遇。我们总结了经验教训，这些教训可能为类似环境中的实践提供信息，并为 COVID-19 后时代的定性研究领域提供反思。主要挑战和克服这些挑战的策略包括：需要对研究人员进行适应技术和同意程序使用的培训；因连接问题而准备缩短访谈时间；以及采用定期的研究人员汇报。为了消除疑虑，研究人员采取了各种方法与参与者接触，包括通过多种渠道传达研究信息、强调与当地机构的联系以提高可信度。访谈大多取得了成功，并且包含了有意义的深度、细微差别和说服力，使团队能够实现研究目标。融洽关系仍然受益于传统的访谈技巧，包括注意力和访谈指南的流畅性。虽然残疾人群体可能会遇到不同的障碍，但所包括的案例研究在地理和目标上有所不同，都经历了更快的招募和更有力的注册。减少面对面的旅行降低了访谈成本，并增加了那些原本可能不会参加的群体的参与度。在我们看来，远程数据收集不是面对面努力的替代品，而是一个非常有益的补充。它可以增加参与者贡献的可及性和公平性，降低成本，同时在多个研究目标人群和环境中保持丰富的数据收集。
