ArticleResearch ethics2025
Pragmatic and ethical challenges in navigating inauthentic participation in remote qualitative research.
Article in Research ethics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- "Gasoline on a Fire That Was Already Burning": Black Americans' Reasons for Acquiring Firearms in the Early Pandemic Era.SSM. Qualitative research in health · 2025Article
- Recommendations for conducting qualitative research on multiple long-term conditions (MLTC) from a qualitative methods community of practice.Journal of multimorbidity and comorbidityArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Restrictions put in place during the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a rapid shift towards remote qualitative recruitment and data collection. This shift generated considerable opportunities to conduct qualitative research, but also introduced novel challenges to data integrity in the form of inauthentic participants. While newer literature describes potential strategies that may be deployed to target concerns related to inauthentic participation, an explicit focus on equity and ethical considerations has been largely absent from current discourse. Here we describe our experiences and challenges conducting a study aimed at exploring reasons for recent firearm acquisition among Black Americans. We describe the mitigation strategies we implemented, as well as the ethical challenges and potential consequences that emerged. Our team identified three specific ethical considerations:
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.