ArticleInternational journal of qualitative methods
Responsible Sharing of Qualitative Research Data: Insights From a Pioneering Project in the United States.
Article in International journal of qualitative methods. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Qualitative research data, such as data from focus groups and in-depth interviews, are increasingly made publicly available and used by secondary researchers, which promotes open science and improves research transparency. This has prompted concerns about the sensitivity of these data, participant confidentiality, data ownership, and the time burden and cost of de-identifying data. As more qualitative researchers (QRs) share sensitive data, they will need support to share responsibly. Few repositories provide qualitative data sharing guidance, and currently, researchers must manually de-identify data prior to sharing. To address these needs, our QDS team worked to identify and reduce ethical and practical barriers to sharing qualitative research data in health sciences research. We developed specific QDS guidelines and tools for data de-identification, depositing, and sharing. Additionally, we developed and tested Qualitative Data Sharing (QuaDS) Software to support qualitative data de-identification. We assisted 28 qualitative health science researchers in preparing and de-identifying data for deposit in a repository. Here, we describe the process of recruiting, enrolling, and assisting QRs to use the guidelines and software and report on the revisions we made to our processes and software based on feedback from QRs and curators and observations made by project team members. Through our pilot project, we demonstrate that qualitative data sharing is feasible and can be done responsibly.
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.