Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37317821›Full record

ArticlePublic health nursing (Boston, Mass.)

Virtual interviewing with marginalized young adult mothers: appreciating the New Norm.

Serena C Flaherty, Lois S Sadler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health nursing (Boston, Mass.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Serena C FlahertyWeill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3952-0532
Lois S SadlerYale University School of Nursing and Yale Child Study Center, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.

Funding

NRSA Training CoreTL1TR001864 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI CANTLEY, LLOYD G, EDELMAN, E. JENNIFER · 2016 to 2025
$9.9M
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR001864
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveVirtual interviewing in qualitative research may promote inclusion, diversify samples, and maximize participation, but there is limited research regarding methodological best practices for marginalized study populations. Emerging adult (ages 18-29) and young adult (through age 40) mothers have ongoing stressors and competing responsibilities that may preclude participation with in-person interviews. The purpose of this article is to describe the processes and experiences of virtual interviewing among young adult mothers living in under-resourced communities, based on their responses to specific interview questions. DESIGN AND SAMPLE: As part of an explanatory sequential mixed methods study, qualitative interviews were conducted with a sample of young adult mothers who had previously participated in randomized controlled trials testing an intensive early home visiting intervention. Thirty-one participants (M = 29.7 years, SD = 2.5) who identified as Black (39%), Hispanic (55%), and White (7%), were interviewed using Zoom.

resultsThe overarching theme was Zoom: Appreciating the New Norm. Identified categories were Practical Benefits of Virtual Interviewing, Sharing Stories, and Drawbacks of Virtual Interviewing.

conclusionFindings support virtual interviewing as a feasible and potentially ideal method for qualitative studies with emerging/young adults. Further research to examine this approach with other marginalized populations may lead to more inclusive representation in qualitative research.

Indexed as

MothersAdultFemaleHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicYoung Adultemerging adultsqualitative researchvirtual interviewingyoung adults

Identifiers

PMID37317821
PMCPMC10530169

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.