ArticleJournal of medical education and curricular development
Building Qualitative Research Capacity in Implementation Laboratories: Outcomes of a Structured Training Program in ICON-3 PBRN, Nigeria.
Article in Journal of medical education and curricular development. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Qualitative methods are essential to capture lived experience and contextual nuance, but many frontline data collectors in Nigeria lack systematic training. This study evaluated a structured, practice-oriented training for Site Research Coordinators (SRCs) across Nigeria's implementation laboratories. Methods: Twelve SRCs participated in a pre-post evaluation assessing core conceptual knowledge, informed-consent practices, interview preparation/conduct, and self-reported confidence and practice. Items were dichotomized and analyzed using exact McNemar tests and percentage-point change with 95% confidence intervals. Results: The training produced a marked improvement in understanding the purpose of interview guides (8.3% → 91.7%; p = .002). Substantial absolute gains (+41.7 percentage points) were also observed in preparing open-ended questions and recognizing effective probing techniques; however, these changes did not reach statistical significance (p = .06), likely due to the small sample size. High baseline performance on ethical consent items limited measurable change. Across items with observed improvement, all discordant pairs reflected change from incorrect to correct responses, indicating consistent directional learning rather than random variation. Conclusions: Short, practice-oriented training can produce meaningful improvements in specific qualitative-research competencies among SRCs. To translate these gains into durable field practice, training should be paired with supervised fieldwork, mentorship, and institutional supports. The study produced a practical training guide to support scale-up and future evaluation.
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.