Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38957495›Full record

ArticleATS scholar2024

Seven Practical Recommendations for Designing and Conducting Qualitative Research in Medical Education.

Patrick G Lyons, Sherie A Gause, Michelle N Eakin, Bridget C O'Brien, Lekshmi Santhosh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ATS scholar, 2024. 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

5 authors.

Patrick G LyonsDepartment of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1557-2787
Sherie A GauseDepartment of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Michelle N EakinDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; and.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8587-8343
Bridget C O'BrienDepartment of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9591-5243
Lekshmi SanthoshDepartment of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9897-3462

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Qualitative research seeks to provide context, nuance, and depth of understanding in regard to systems, behaviors, and/or lived experiences. As such, it plays a key role in many areas of medical education. Composed of myriad methods and methodologies, each of which may be valuable for some areas of inquiry but less so for others, qualitative research can be challenging to design, conduct, and report. This challenge can be conceptualized as ensuring that the study design, conduct, and reporting are "fit for purpose," following directly from a well-formulated research question. In this Perspective, we share seven important and practical recommendations to enhance the design and conduct of high-quality qualitative research in medical education:

Indexed as

methodsqualitativeresearch design

Identifiers

PMID38957495
PMCPMC11215997

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.