Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, Division of Health Services Research, College of Pharmacy, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Int J Pharm Pract. 2021 Oct 18;29(5):416-427. doi: 10.1093/ijpp/riab027.
To evaluate the reporting quality for a sample of community pharmacy qualitative research articles based on the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) guidelines, data interpretation and use of theory.
A systematic literature search was conducted using Ovid MEDLINE to identify qualitative research related to community pharmacy. Data were extracted and evaluated based on the SRQR standards, data interpretation level and use of theory. Adherence to standards was analysed using descriptive statistics.
Eighty-one studies were retrieved through the database search (n = 81). Then, 31 studies met the inclusion criteria after screening abstracts and full texts. Twelve out of 21 SRQR were present in more than 80% of the studies. However, essential standards, such as research approach, reflexivity and trustworthiness techniques, were absent or partially present in 30 (97%) studies, 30 (97%) studies and 21 (68%) studies, respectively. Data interpretation level was descriptive in 27 (87%) studies and interpretive or partially interpretive in 4 (13%) studies. Theory was absent in 19 (60%) and implied, partially integrated or retrospectively applied in 12 (40%) of the studies.
Trustworthiness and quality of qualitative inferences within community pharmacy research could be enhanced with increasing awareness about reporting; the approach and paradigm, reflexivity, trustworthiness techniques, data interpretation level and theoretical use.
根据《定性研究报告标准》（SRQR）指南、数据解释和理论使用情况，评估一组社区药学定性研究文章的报告质量。
通过 Ovid MEDLINE 进行系统文献检索，以确定与社区药学相关的定性研究。根据 SRQR 标准、数据解释水平和理论使用情况提取和评估数据。使用描述性统计分析来分析对标准的遵守情况。
通过数据库搜索检索到 81 项研究（n = 81）。然后，经过筛选摘要和全文，有 31 项研究符合纳入标准。在 21 项 SRQR 中有 12 项出现在超过 80%的研究中。然而，在 30 项（97%）研究、30 项（97%）研究和 21 项（68%）研究中分别存在或部分存在研究方法、反思和可信度技术等基本标准。27 项（87%）研究的数据分析水平为描述性，4 项（13%）研究为解释性或部分解释性。19 项（60%）研究没有理论，12 项（40%）研究隐含、部分整合或回顾性应用。
通过提高对报告的认识，可以提高社区药学研究中定性推论的可信度和质量；方法和范式、反思、可信度技术、数据解释水平和理论使用。
