ArticleJournal of primary care & community health
Utilization of Rapid Qualitative Analysis to Evaluate Intervention Acceptability, Usefulness, and Ease of Implementation in a Community Health Center.
Article in Journal of primary care & community health. 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
Abstract
ObjectivesTo provide a case example of the use of rapid qualitative analysis (RQA) method to evaluate intervention acceptability, usefulness, and ease of implementation to support healthcare worker well-being in a community health center. We demonstrate steps of the RQA method with data from the workflow redesign evidence-based intervention.MethodsFour semi-structured focus groups were conducted on Zoom with healthcare workers of different occupations (N=22) between March - May 2025. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative data were analyzed using RQA. Trustworthiness of findings was assured with three analysts.ResultsThe RQA methodology facilitated in depth exploration of findings in an expedited time frame, aligning with the immediate goal of identifying supportive measures for healthcare workers. RQA optimized the momentum of change to be collaborative with healthcare workers and leadership. Workflow redesign was consistently identified by participants as an acceptable and useful intervention to improve well-being, with emphasis on the importance of leadership support, resource allocation, and active involvement of frontline healthcare staff in all phases of intervention development and implementation.ConclusionsWe used RQA to analyze qualitative data to provide timely, actionable insights that continue to inform the development, implementation, and tailoring of interventions to support healthcare worker well-being in this community health center. Participants highlighted early staff involvement, clear communication between staff and leadership, and clarity of objectives/purpose to support intervention implementation.
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.