Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35105654›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Development and use of research vignettes to collect qualitative data from healthcare professionals: a scoping review.

Dominique Tremblay, Annie Turcotte, Nassera Touati, Thomas G Poder, Kelley Kilpatrick, Karine Bilodeau, Mathieu Roy, Patrick O Richard, Sylvie Lessard, Émilie Giordano

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing 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

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Increasing HPV and Cervical Cancer Education Among Native American Communities and Healthcare Providers.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

10 authors.

Dominique TremblaySchool of Nursing, Université de Sherbrooke, Longueuil, Quebec, Canada dominique.tremblay2@usherbrooke.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-1798-5681
Annie TurcotteSchool of Nursing, Université de Sherbrooke, Longueuil, Quebec, Canada.
Nassera TouatiÉcole Nationale d'Administration Publique, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Thomas G PoderSchool of Public Health, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Kelley KilpatrickIngram School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2137-6560
Karine BilodeauFaculty of Nursing, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Mathieu RoyDepartment of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada.
Patrick O RichardDepartment of Surgery, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada.
Sylvie LessardCentre de recherche Charles-Le Moyne, Longueuil, Quebec, Canada.
Émilie GiordanoCentre de recherche Charles-Le Moyne, Longueuil, Quebec, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo clarify the definition of vignette-based methodology in qualitative research and to identify key elements underpinning its development and utilisation in qualitative empirical studies involving healthcare professionals.

designScoping review according to the Joanna Briggs Institute framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases: Academic Search Complete, CINAHL Plus, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and SocINDEX (January 2000-December 2020). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Empirical studies in English or French with a qualitative design including an explicit methodological description of the development and/or use of vignettes to collect qualitative data from healthcare professionals. Titles and abstracts were screened, and full text was reviewed by pairs of researchers according to inclusion/exclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data extraction included study characteristics, definition, development and utilisation of a vignette, as well as strengths, limitations and recommendations from authors of the included articles. Systematic qualitative thematic analysis was performed, followed by data matrices to display the findings according to the scoping review questions.

resultsTen articles were included. An explicit definition of vignettes was provided in only half the studies. Variations of the development process (steps, expert consultation and pretesting), data collection and analysis demonstrate opportunities for improvement in rigour and transparency of the whole research process. Most studies failed to address quality criteria of the wider qualitative design and to discuss study limitations.

conclusionsVignette-based studies in qualitative research appear promising to deepen our understanding of sensitive and challenging situations lived by healthcare professionals. However, vignettes require conceptual clarification and robust methodological guidance so that researchers can systematically plan their study. Focusing on quality criteria of qualitative design can produce stronger evidence around measures that may help healthcare professionals reflect on and learn to cope with adversity.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelText MessagingData AccuracyDelivery of Health CareHumansQualitative Researchhuman resource managementqualitative researchquality in health carerisk management

Identifiers

PMID35105654
PMCPMC8804653

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.