ReviewMedical education2025
When words fail us: An integrative review of innovative elicitation techniques for qualitative interviews.
Review in Medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mirrors and prisms: How interprofessional interactions influence medical students' professional identity formation.Medical education · 2026Article
- Exploring sensitive topics in assessment research through vignette-based interviewing.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Big Data, Small Stories: Methodological Considerations for Using Social Media Analytics in Medical Education Research.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- "Meeting a human, not a medical condition": a qualitative study of simulated patients' perceptions of forming a therapeutic alliance with psychiatrists.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2026Article
- Journey mapping as an inclusive research tool: Capturing the learning journeys of health professions educators with dyslexia.Medical education · 2026Review
- Picture This: The Use of Visual Methods in Health Professions and Medical Education Research.Family medicine · 2026Review
- Exploring sensory aspects of cutlery in neurodivergent-informed eating disorder care.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Synthetic Emotions and the Illusion of Measurement: A Conceptual Review and Critique of Measurement Paradigms in Affective Science.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- A Practical Guide to Writing Effective Needs Assessments in Graduate Medical Education.Journal of graduate medical education · 2025Article
- Surgical Trainees' Lived Experience of Entrustable Professional Activities: Assessment in the Australasian Context.ANZ journal of surgery · 2025Article
- When words fail us: An integrative review of innovative elicitation techniques for qualitative interviews.Medical education · 2025Review
- Expanding the toolkit: a call for embracing methodological diversity in healthcare professions education research.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Identity Work: A Qualitative Study of Residents' Experiences Navigating Identity Struggles.Perspectives on medical education · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionInterviews are central to many qualitative studies in health professions education (HPE). However, researchers often struggle to elicit rich data and engage diverse participants who may find this strategy exclusionary. Elicitation techniques are strategies tailored to address these challenges, enhancing oral conversations through other forms of interaction-for example, participant photography and neighbourhood walks. These strategies are tailored to elicit the rich data needed to address complex problems and meaningfully engage participants. Unfortunately, guidance on these techniques is scattered across literatures from diverse fields. In this synthesis, we offer an overview of the elicitation techniques available and advice about how to choose between them.
methodsWe conducted an integrative review, drawing on methodological literature from across the health and social sciences. Our interdisciplinary searches yielded 3056 citations. We included 293 citations that were methodologically focused and discussed elicitation techniques used in interviews with adults. We then extracted specific elicitation techniques, summarising each technique to capture key features, as well as strengths and weaknesses. From this, we developed a framework to help researchers identify challenges in their interview-based research and to select elicitation techniques that address their challenges.
resultsTo enrich data, researchers might seek to shift conversations away from participants' entrenched narratives, to externalise conversations on sensitive topics, or to elicit affect, tacit knowledge or contextual details. When empowering participants, researchers might seek to increase equity between the researcher and participant or foster interview accessibility across diverse participant populations. DISCUSSION: When chosen with study goals in mind, elicitation techniques can enrich interview data. To harness this potential, we need to re-conceptualise interviews as co-production of knowledge by researcher(s) and participant(s). To make interviews more equitable and accessible, we need to consider flexibility so that each participant can engage in ways that best suit their needs and preferences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.