ArticleBMC medical research methodology2026
Theory in qualitative research: a qualitative study of research experts' views.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are long-standing debates about the relationship between theory and qualitative research and how the two are connected. While some researchers argue that theory in qualitative research is often superficial and poorly reported, others have highlighted inconsistencies in the application of theory in qualitative research, with it frequently being absent. We had previously developed a typology (known as QUANTUM) in discussing these issues, and wanted to use this as a springboard from which to engage in further debate.
methodsWe engaged with an international panel of 14 qualitative research experts to elicit their views on the place of theory in qualitative research. In a two-stage process, the expert panel provided written comments on the QUANTUM typology and then took part in an interactive, online workshop. Data generated from both stages were analysed thematically. An adapted version of the ‘Five Ways of Knowing’ was used as the theoretical framework for structuring the inductively derived thematic findings in a post-hoc fashion.
resultsThe analysis led to the conceptualisation of five themes that were organised according to the components of the ‘Five Ways of Knowing’, namely: (1) Defining Theory; (2) Working with Theory; (3) Positioning Theory; (4) Researchers’ Underlying Epistemological Assumptions; and (5) Problematising Theory.
conclusionsThe themes are discussed against the backdrop of current literature on the topic, capturing the complexity of theory in qualitative research. The input received from the experts facilitated the development of the revised QUANTUM typology, which provides a reflexive aide for the conduct and reporting of theory in qualitative 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.