Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41005775›Full record

ReviewBMJ open2025

Workshops as a qualitative research method in health research.

Alicia O'Cathain

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Integrating Dietitians Into Primary Dental Care for Paediatric Populations: Developing a Conceptual Service Pathway Through a Professional Stakeholder Workshop.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Developing and Assessing the Acceptability of an Information Booklet for Patients in Surveillance for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: An Intervention Development Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

1 author.

Alicia O'CathainSheffield Centre of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK a.ocathain@sheffield.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4033-506X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimResearchers are increasingly using workshops within health research, particularly in the context of developing complex interventions. The status of workshops within health research is not clear. Are workshops a research method or a form of stakeholder involvement akin to patient and public involvement? Do they require ethics approval? How are data collected and analysed? How should the results be published - if at all?

methodsReflection on the methodological literature. REFLECTIONS: Researchers can frame workshops as a qualitative research method if they aim to generate new knowledge that is useful to stakeholders external to their research project and therefore aim to publish the findings of the workshops. In that context, ethics approval is required, with written informed consent taken from participants. Data collection can occur using a range of approaches including post-it notes, handwritten notes or audio or video recordings of discussions. Data can be analysed using a range of approaches including thematic or content analysis. Like any qualitative research, results can be published in a research article. A list of issues to consider and report when undertaking workshops as a research method is offered, based on methodological literature from a range of research fields. Alternatively, researchers can frame workshops as 'stakeholder involvement in research' if they aim to identify knowledge for use within their research project only. The product of these workshops might be characterised as a set of actions for the research team to take. Formal analysis will not be necessary-merely identification of actions-and reporting within publications may be similar to the reporting of patient and public involvement activity with a research project. Researchers may face grey areas when deciding which route to adopt. Team reflection and documenting the justification for the decision made may help to formulate appropriate decisions.

Indexed as

EducationHealth Services ResearchQualitative ResearchResearch DesignHumansResearch PersonnelStakeholder ParticipationHealth ServicesQUALITATIVE RESEARCHSTATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODS

Identifiers

PMID41005775
PMCPMC12481299

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.