Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32807161›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2020

Health professionals learning qualitative research in their workplace: a focused ethnography.

Luca Ghirotto, Ludovica De Panfilis, Silvia Di Leo

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05730946 (Understanding The Challenges and Concerns Faced by Parents of Children With Cleft Lip and/or Palate), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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.

NCT05730946 completednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Understanding The Challenges and Concerns Faced by Parents of Children With Cleft Lip and/or Palate: A Qualitative Study

TypeobservationalSponsorAin Shams UniversityRan2022 to 2023Enrolled12ConditionsCleft Lip and PalateArmsInterview- based questionnaire
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The search for meaning in health care inquiries: introducing qualitative meaning analysis.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2024
    Article
  2. Lessons learned from qualitative fieldwork in a multilingual setting.Qualitative research in medicine & healthcare · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Luca GhirottoAzienda USL - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Viale Umberto I°, 50, 42123, Reggio Emilia, Italy. luca.ghirotto@ausl.re.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7632-1271
Ludovica De PanfilisAzienda USL - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Viale Umberto I°, 50, 42123, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Silvia Di LeoAzienda USL - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Viale Umberto I°, 50, 42123, Reggio Emilia, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe interest for qualitative research methodology has expanded beyond theoretical academic research on medical education, gathering interest from all healthcare professionals. Qualitative research has potentials in exploring the social, emotional, psychological aspects of care and in broadening professionals' scientific competencies. Nonetheless, qualitative research has still not been embraced within formal and academic curricula for future professionals, preventing newer generations from appreciating the value of its epistemological and methodological aspects and from using it in the development and implementation of clinical research. The purpose of this study was to comprehend the attitudes of health professionals learning and conducting qualitative studies within a practical training program developed in their workplace.

methodsThe present work consisted of a focused ethnography, including 14 professionals during their one-year attendance training on qualitative research methodology. Strategies used for collecting data included participant observations, field notes, semi-structured interviews, and a focus group. All the data were analyzed consistently with ethnographic indications.

resultsAnalyses allowed us to evidence the educational, motivational, group-related and organizational factors influencing the attitudes and skill acquisition of healthcare professionals learning and conducting qualitative research within a practical training program developed in their workplace. Prior educational background was perceived as a sort of barrier. Nonetheless, the training boosted a change in attitude both in terms of appreciation of the research approach and trainees' emotional involvement with research participants. Doing a qualitative study in a multidisciplinary team raised in-group dynamics that hindered bringing the studies to conclusion. Trainees repeatedly lamented the difficulty in managing time to devote to research-related activities and questioned the feasibility of adopting this methodology for conducting research in their workplace.

conclusionsContinual education training on the methodological aspects and practical implications of qualitative research may foster a renewed attitude towards one's professional education, while making inter-professional relationship issues emerge. Nonetheless, broadening the perspectives of professionals on their clinical practice by means of learning qualitative methodology may have an evident quality improvement return. Strategies for future qualitative research methodology hands-on training addressed to health professionals in continuing education are proposed.

Indexed as

Education, ProfessionalHealth PersonnelAnthropology, CulturalHumansLearningQualitative ResearchWorkplaceCancer ResearchClinical Cancer centerContinuing learningContinuing medical educationHealthcare professionalsProfessional developmentQualitative Research methodsResearch skills

Identifiers

PMID32807161
PMCPMC7433130

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.