Mew Louise E, Heaslip Vanessa, Immins Tikki, Ramasamy Arul, Wainwright Thomas W
Milton Keynes University Hospital, Milton Keynes, UK.
Equity School of Nursing and Society, University of Salford, Salford, UK.
Bone Jt Open. 2024 Nov 1;5(11):953-961. doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.511.BJO-2024-0145.R1.
The evidence base within trauma and orthopaedics has traditionally favoured quantitative research methodologies. Qualitative research can provide unique insights which illuminate patient experiences and perceptions of care. Qualitative methods reveal the subjective narratives of patients that are not captured by quantitative data, providing a more comprehensive understanding of patient-centred care. The aim of this study is to quantify the level of qualitative research within the orthopaedic literature.
A bibliometric search of journals' online archives and multiple databases was undertaken in March 2024, to identify articles using qualitative research methods in the top 12 trauma and orthopaedic journals based on the 2023 impact factor and SCImago rating. The bibliometric search was conducted and reported in accordance with the preliminary guideline for reporting bibliometric reviews of the biomedical literature (BIBLIO).
Of the 7,201 papers reviewed, 136 included qualitative methods (0.1%). There was no significant difference between the journals, apart from , which included 21 studies using qualitative methods, equalling 4% of its published articles.
This study demonstrates that there is a very low number of qualitative research papers published within trauma and orthopaedic journals. Given the increasing focus on patient outcomes and improving the patient experience, it may be argued that there is a requirement to support both quantitative and qualitative approaches to orthopaedic research. Combining qualitative and quantitative methods may effectively address the complex and personal aspects of patients' care, ensuring that outcomes align with patient values and enhance overall care quality.
创伤与骨科领域的证据基础传统上倾向于定量研究方法。定性研究能够提供独特的见解，阐明患者的就医体验和对护理的看法。定性方法揭示了定量数据未涵盖的患者主观叙述，有助于更全面地理解以患者为中心的护理。本研究旨在量化骨科文献中定性研究的水平。
2024年3月对期刊在线存档和多个数据库进行文献计量检索，以识别基于2023年影响因子和Scimago排名的前12种创伤与骨科期刊中使用定性研究方法的文章。文献计量检索按照生物医学文献计量学综述报告的初步指南（BIBLIO）进行并报告。
在审查的7201篇论文中，136篇采用了定性方法（0.1%）。各期刊之间无显著差异， 除外，该期刊有21项使用定性方法的研究，占其发表文章的4%。
本研究表明，创伤与骨科期刊上发表的定性研究论文数量非常少。鉴于对患者结局和改善患者体验的关注度不断提高，可能有人认为需要支持骨科研究的定量和定性方法。将定性和定量方法相结合可以有效解决患者护理中复杂和个性化的方面，确保结果符合患者价值观并提高整体护理质量。
