Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35321397›Full record

ReviewJAC-antimicrobial resistance2022

The value, challenges and practical considerations of conducting qualitative research on antimicrobial stewardship in primary care.

Marta Wanat, Marta Santillo, Aleksandra J Borek, Christopher C Butler, Sibyl Anthierens, Sarah Tonkin-Crine

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

6 authors.

Marta WanatNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0163-1547
Marta SantilloNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Aleksandra J BorekNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6029-5291
Christopher C ButlerNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0102-3453
Sibyl AnthierensDepartment of Family Medicine and Population Health, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Sarah Tonkin-CrineNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4470-1151

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In order to design appropriate antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programmes, it is crucial to understand challenges to tackling antibiotic resistance (AMR) specific to each healthcare setting. Antibiotic prescribing in primary care accounts for most prescriptions with a significant proportion considered clinically inappropriate. Qualitative research has a long history in social sciences, but its value and contribution are still contested in medical journals including in the AMR/AMS field. However, through its focus on understanding, meaning making and explaining, qualitative research can offer insights in how to improve AMS efforts in primary care. This paper provides an overview of unique considerations, contributions and challenges related to using qualitative research in AMS to help the AMS community new to qualitative research to utilize its potential most fully. First, we discuss specific considerations for AMS in relation to the stages of conducting a qualitative study, including identifying a research question and choosing a suitable methodology; sampling appropriate participants; planning a recruitment strategy; choosing a method of data collection; and conducting data analysis. These are illustrated with examples of qualitative AMS studies in primary care. Second, we highlight the importance of patient and public involvement throughout all stages of the project and ensuring quality in qualitative AMS research. Finally, drawing on these considerations, we make a further case for the value and contribution of qualitative methodologies in AMS/AMR research while outlining future directions for both AMS and qualitative research, including the need for studies with diverse actors; interdisciplinary collaborations; and complex decisions on methodologies and timelines.

Identifiers

PMID35321397
PMCPMC8935206

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.