Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39588017›Full record

ReviewCanadian medical education journal2024

Six ways to get a grip on developing reflexivity statements.

Heather Braund, Jennifer Turnnidge, Nicholas Cofie, Oluwatoyosi Kuforiji, Sarah Greco, Amber Hastings-Truelove, Shannon Hill, Nancy Dalgarno

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Canadian medical education journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Focus on faculty development.Canadian medical education journal · 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

8 authors.

Heather BraundOffice of Professional Development and Educational Scholarship, Queen's Health Sciences, Queen's University, Ontario, Canada.
Jennifer TurnnidgeOffice of Professional Development and Educational Scholarship, Queen's Health Sciences, Queen's University, Ontario, Canada.
Nicholas CofieOffice of Professional Development and Educational Scholarship, Queen's Health Sciences, Queen's University, Ontario, Canada.
Oluwatoyosi KuforijiOffice of Professional Development and Educational Scholarship, Queen's Health Sciences, Queen's University, Ontario, Canada.
Sarah GrecoOffice of Professional Development and Educational Scholarship, Queen's Health Sciences, Queen's University, Ontario, Canada.
Amber Hastings-TrueloveOffice of Professional Development and Educational Scholarship, Queen's Health Sciences, Queen's University, Ontario, Canada.
Shannon HillSchool of Rehabilitation Therapy, Queen's Health Sciences, Queen's University, Ontario, Canada.
Nancy DalgarnoOffice of Professional Development and Educational Scholarship, Queen's Health Sciences, Queen's University, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Qualitative researchers have underscored the value and importance of being reflexive in the research process, yet existing guidelines or checklists on how to practically address reflexivity are often scant and scattered across studies. In this scholarly perspective, we review, analyse, and present an overview of conceptions of reflexivity. Further, we offer practical guidelines for addressing and developing reflexivity statements in qualitative research. We describe reflexivity as both a concept and a deliberate ongoing process that requires a certain level of researcher consciousness, reflection, introspection, self-awareness, and an analytic attention to the researcher's role in the research process at all stages. We highlight the notion that reflexivity offers researchers an opportunity to examine potential assumptions, through the continuous process of questioning, examining, accepting, and articulating our attitudes, assumptions, perspectives, and roles. We present six recommendations to promote dialogue on the practice of reflexivity among researchers from various ontological and epistemological communities and encourage them to develop their own reflexivity practices.

Indexed as

Qualitative ResearchHumansResearch DesignResearch Personnel

Identifiers

PMID39588017
PMCPMC11586026

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.