Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31088351›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2019

Q sample construction: a novel approach incorporating a Delphi technique to explore opinions about codeine dependence.

Melissa Kirschbaum, Tony Barnett, Merylin Cross

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Melissa KirschbaumUniversity of Tasmania Centre for Rural Health, Locked Bag 1372, Launceston, Tasmania, 7250, Australia. Melissa.Kirschbaum@utas.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-3074-3388
Tony BarnettUniversity of Tasmania Centre for Rural Health, Locked Bag 1372, Launceston, Tasmania, 7250, Australia.
Merylin CrossUniversity of Tasmania Centre for Rural Health, Locked Bag 1372, Launceston, Tasmania, 7250, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundQ methodology is an evidenced approach to researching subjectivity, involving a combination of qualitative and quantitative techniques. The methodology has been used successfully in healthcare research to explore the opinions of patients and healthcare providers about topics such as the illness experience, healthcare services, clinical practice and professional training. Q methodology studies require the generation of a Q sample, a set of opinion statements representing the phenomenon of interest. This paper describes a novel and rigorous approach to develop a Q sample for a study exploring misusers' opinions about over-the-counter (OTC) codeine dependence and critically examines the associated methodological issues.

methodsDevelopment of the Q sample in this study involved three steps; (1) identification of opinion statements via a comprehensive literature search, (2) application of a theoretical framework, the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation - Behaviour (COM-B) model of behaviour, to group and then reduce the number of statements and (3) use of a Delphi technique to achieve expert consensus on the final selection of statements. The Delphi component involved a multidisciplinary panel of 15 addiction experts comprised of doctors, nurses, pharmacists, psychologists and researchers, who were recruited purposively. Experts rated each statement using a 5-point scale of perceived importance. Two Delphi rounds were undertaken and consensus for inclusion of a statement was set at a median score of ≥4 and an interquartile range of ≤1.

resultsA total of 842 statements representing codeine misusers' opinions about OTC codeine dependence were identified from the literature. Statements were grouped thematically using the COM-B framework and representative statements were selected, reducing the number to 111. After two Delphi rounds, addiction experts achieved consensus on 46 statements which formed the final Q sample.

conclusionsThis paper describes a new and systematic approach to Q sample construction and explores associated methodological issues that could be useful for those considering Q methodology and for furthering the rigour of this research technique.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthDelphi TechniqueCodeineHumansSubstance-Related DisordersSurveys and QuestionnairesCodeineAttitudesCodeineCOM-BDelphi techniqueDrug addictionMixed methodsQ methodology

Identifiers

PMID31088351
PMCPMC6518693

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.