ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2025
Research methodologies in genetic counseling: Grounded theory.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 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.
- Perceptions of Pharmacogenomic Testing Among People With Treatment Resistant Depression: Legitimization as a Facilitator of Acceptance.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Introduction to the Special Issue on Research Methods in Genetic Counseling: Diverse Methods, Shared Purpose.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- "Straddling two worlds": complexities of spousal caregiving in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis during younger middle age.BMC palliative care · 2026Article
- Qualitative research reporting in genetic counseling: A state-of-the-art assessment and recommendations for enhancing methodological congruence and quality.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Review
- Research methodologies in genetic counseling: Grounded theory.Journal of genetic counseling · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Grounded theory was first described by Glaser and Strauss (1967, The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine) as the "discovery of theory from data," and describes a group of related methodologies that share key elements of study design and data analysis. Since its inception, grounded theory has evolved into several subtypes with different philosophical underpinnings, the most common of which are post-positivism and constructivism. In post-positivist interpretive frameworks, research is guided by a series of rigorous and logically related steps to identify a single objective underlying reality. In constructivist interpretive frameworks, the researcher strives to understand the meaning participants make of a phenomenon within their social and historical context, recognizing that their own position and perspectives shape their interpretation of their participants' experiences. Grounded theory studies include multiple stages of coding, concurrent collection and analysis of data, constant comparative data analysis, theoretical sampling, and memo-writing to capture researcher reflections and evolving theoretical ideas. The outcome of the study should be a substantive theory that is grounded in the data and describes the phenomenon being studied. Publications relevant to the genetic counseling profession have used a grounded theory approach to investigate a range of topics including patient experiences, professional issues, and genetic counseling education. This article describes the theoretical underpinnings and defining characteristics of grounded theory, provides an overview of post-positivist and constructivist grounded theory approaches, and outlines key elements to consider when conducting and evaluating grounded theory research.
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.