ArticleResearch in nursing & health2025
A Practical Example of How to Apply Constructivist Grounded Theory Methodology: Exploring Patient Experiences During Paramedic Led Healthcare.
Article in Research in nursing & health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Personal and Societal Recovery in Depression-A Qualitative Study.International journal of mental health nursing · 2026Article
- Ecological continuity in sustainable higher education under SDG 4.7: a process model of participation competence.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Preferences, Perceptions, and Use of Online Nutrition Content Among Young Australian Adults: Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Weight loss journeys: Exploring social influences and determinants of health in an exploratory rural German intervention.PloS one · 2025Article
- Implementation of Early Mobilization in Post-CABG Patients: A Constructivist Grounded Theory Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Application of qualitative enquiry is necessary to improve the understanding of patient experience during paramedic-led healthcare. Grounded Theory (GT) is acknowledged as a rigorous qualitative methodology useful for exploring social processes present during healthcare, particularly when little existing knowledge or theory exists. Despite wide use of GT in other health disciplines there are few studies that have used this methodology to guide research in paramedicine. This may be due to GT methods appearing complex and disorientating for both novice and experienced researchers. This methodological article provides a practical example of how Kathy Charmaz's "constructivist" approach to grounded theory (GTc) was applied during research that explored how patients experience paramedic-led healthcare during non-conveyance situations. It explains the fundamental tenets required of GTc research and describes how they were employed during the example research. The article aims to demystify the GTc process and improve the rigour of qualitative GTc research in paramedicine and health disciplines. How to apply Constructivist Grounded Theory methodology is described by providing a practical example of research into patient experience. This article informs researchers how to maintain trustworthiness and credibility when applying GTc methodology. This article describes research that explored how patients experience paramedic-led healthcare. The data was generated through individual interviews between the researcher and patients who had recent experiences of ambulance service healthcare that resulted in not being transported to a hospital ED. Patients or the public were not involved in the conceptualisation or research design of this article or the practical example provided.
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.