Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38629057›Full record

ArticleQualitative research in medicine & healthcare2024

Lessons learned from qualitative fieldwork in a multilingual setting.

Shweta Jain Verma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Qualitative research in medicine & healthcare, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Editorial: Getting out of our heads through qualitative research in healthcare.Qualitative research in medicine & healthcare · 2024
    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

1 author.

Shweta Jain VermaDepartment of Neurology, Christian Medical College, Ludhiana, Punjab, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Qualitative research conducted in a multilingual setting is an arduous, yet essential, endeavour. As part of my PhD research program, I set out to conduct qualitative process evaluation of a stroke trial in 11 languages in the Indian subcontinent. In this article, I reflect upon the challenges, oversights, and successes that I experienced in the hope of offering insight of use to fellow researchers conducting healthcare fieldwork in multicultural contexts where many languages are spoken. My account starts with a description of the setting's context and the necessity of conducting research in multiple languages. I elaborate on the planning of the study which included selection of the sample and preparation of relevant documents, including informed consent in patients' languages. Subsequent steps entailed submission and approval of requisite documents, setup and training of a research team, and conducting interviews using interpreters. During this process, I developed a hybrid technique for conducting interviews that reduced fatigue for both patient interviewees and interpreters while still yielding in-depth insights. Additionally, I discuss the benefits of engaging professional translators for performing translations. Finally, I introduce a stepwise approach to facilitate the thematic analysis of qualitative data. I believe this account will encourage and empower researchers to pave their own way while anticipating and preparing for potential obstacles when conducting research in similar settings.

Indexed as

cross-languageinterpreterinterviewsMixed methodsrigourtranslator

Identifiers

PMID38629057
PMCPMC11017960

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.