Qualitative Research Abstracts

Qualitative Research Abstracts

Authors
 Joan Ostaszkiewicz, PhD, RN, MNurs
 Donna Z. Bliss, PhD, RN, FGSA, FAAN
 Kathleen F. Hunter PhD, RN, NP, GNC(C), NCA

The International Continence Society (ICS) Scientific Committee currently provides the following
abstract submission guidelines:

 RCT Consort Abstract Guidelines

 ICS Terminology Report 2002
 IUGA/ICS Terminology Report 2009
 ICS Video Abstract Submission Rules
 ICS Video Form
 ICS Abstract Submission Rules
 ICS Abstract Form http://www.ics.org/Documents/Documents.aspx?FolderID=211
At its 2015 annual general meeting, the ICS Nursing Committee discussed the concept of drafting an
informational document about submitting qualitative research abstracts to the ICS Scientific
Committee. Therefore, the purpose of this document is to provide guidance to promote
understanding and submission of high quality qualitative research abstracts to the ICS Annual
Scientific Meeting. The document does not replace the ICS Abstract Submission Rules, but aides in
the interpretation and application of the rules for qualitative research.
Qualitative research: What it is and what it isn’t

Qualitative research methods are an exploratory method of enquiry that typically involves
investigating unknown subject matter, sensitive topics, or difficult to access populations. Unlike in
quantitative research, researchers do not start out with a hypothesis to test. The aim is to provide
in-depth understanding, insight, or new ways of understanding an old problem. Qualitative
researchers seek to develop a critical appreciation of social phenomena, meanings, understandings,
interpretations, beliefs, behaviour, or social context. Qualitative research typically answers
questions about the ‘why’ of human behaviour.
Qualitative research is not descriptive research using a quantitative method, and the inclusion of a
section for comments on a quantitative survey does not constitute qualitative research. The results
of qualitative research are an end unto themselves. The purpose of qualitative research is not to
evolve into a quantitative methods study although findings often stimulate other types of studies.
Quantitative and qualitative research methods and approaches provide a more holistic
understanding than can be achieved with one method/approach alone. As stated by Einstein, ‘not
everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts’ (Albert
Einstein). Both qualitative and quantitative research can answer important questions to advance
scientific understanding and knowledge.
Characteristics of good qualitative research
Good qualitative research is underpinned by specific philosophical assumptions about the nature of
knowledge and how it can be determined. The term ‘qualitative research’ is an umbrella term that
covers numerous approaches. Some of the more commonly known ones include: Grounded theory,
Ethnography, Phenomenology, Case study, etc. Others are narrative (life history, oral history,
biography, etc.). As in quantitative research, the choice of approach in qualitative research is
determined by the type of question. Table 1 provides examples of the types of research question
that could be addressed using these different approaches.
Sample sizes in qualitative research are typically small (10-20 subjects), and the participants or sites
are usually purposively sampled. For example, participants are selected on the basis of their
knowledge or experience of the research phenomenon. Data are commonly sought through open-
ended, semi-structured, in-depth interviews and/or through observations. Interview participants
share their perspectives and experiences in their own words and other actions. Raw data and some
results are usually in the form of text or they can be in a visual form such as from photography, or
film.
Table 1.
Selected Core characteristics Type of research question

Qualitative
approaches
Grounded theory A theory-generating methodology What theory or explanation emerges
wherein data are analysed, from an analysis of data collected about
named and used to generate providing continence care in long-term
theory (Glaser 1992; Strauss & aged care facilities?
Corbin 1998).
Ethnography The researcher is usually a What are the cultural characteristics of
participant-observer women with incontinence from Brazil?
Phenomenology Seeks to describe lived What is the lived experience of having a
experiences long-term indwelling catheter?
Case study Facilitates in-depth exploration of What are the characteristics that
research a phenomenon within its context facilitate adjustment to incontinence in a
and using different data sources single case or in comparative cases?
Qualitative research is an interactive process between the researcher and participants. Therefore,
unlike in quantitative research, the researcher does not aim to control for confounding variables or
seek to totally remove themselves from the study. Context is important to understand the data, so
researchers often participate in the study and setting. Lastly, qualitative researchers interpret the
data and experience as a unified whole and not as separate variables.
Reliability and credibility of qualitative research

There are differences in ideas and philosophy between quantitative and qualitative research about
the ability and best way to avoid/reduce bias and portray truth. Within a positivist tradition, “a claim
is considered objective and true to the extent that it is free from any biasing influence of context and
background beliefs and accurately mirrors the way the world really is” (Schwandt, Lincoln & Guba
2007, p. 12). However, as some qualitative researchers assert, no interpretation is free of context
and the very act of generating evidence, or identifying something as evidence is, itself, an
interpretation. Therefore, qualitative researchers who align with interpretivism assert that
generalisation is not a goal because the aim is not to reproduce a set of verifiable accurate
descriptions of participants’ experiences, but rather, to produce an abstract and coherent
representation that describes or explains the underlying situation and addresses the research
objectives. The general criteria for evaluating the quality of qualitative research are similar to those
for quantitative research (see below), however given the major paradigmatic difference of
qualitative research and the range of qualitative approaches, writers of qualitative abstracts need
specific knowledge of each approach in order to interpret and apply these criteria. For example, one
must know what is considered an appropriate method and design to address a research question
suitable for a particular type of qualitative research and whether the analysis is sufficiently rigorous.
Generic criteria for evaluating the quality of qualitative research

The following generic qualitative criteria have been included here for qualitative researchers to
appraise the quality of their research.
1. Was there a clear statement of the aims of the research?

2. Was a qualitative methodology appropriate?
3. Was the research design appropriate to address the aims of the research?
4. Was the recruitment strategy appropriate to the aims of the research?
5. Was the data collected in a way that addressed the research issue?
6. Has the relationship between researcher and participants been adequately considered?
7. Have ethical issues been taken into consideration?
8. Was the data analysis sufficiently rigorous?
9. Is there a clear statement of findings?
10. How valuable is the research?
(Critical Appraisal Skills Programme)
Writing an abstract for ICS about qualitative research

All abstracts submitted to the ICS, regardless of whether they use quantitative methods or
qualitative methods, must use the subtitles given on the ICS blank abstract form:
 Hypothesis / aims of study

o Qualitative research does not start with a hypothesis to test. Writers of qualitative
abstracts should briefly state the nature and significance of the problem, followed
by the aim of the study.
 Study design, materials and methods

o The type of qualitative method should be described under ‘design’.
o Other elements in this section would include addressing the following questions:
 What was the sample? What were the sample’s basic characteristics
(number, age, gender etc)?
 How was the sample selected and why?
 What were the inclusion/exclusion criteria?
 What were the data collection procedures?
 What data were sought and how?
 How were the data analysed?
 Results
o In qualitative research, the results are usually termed ‘Findings’. They are often
presented as themes, or as narrative description.
o In qualitative research, the findings can be presented as themes, or as narrative
description.
 Interpretation of results
o What is the meaning of the findings? What new knowledge do the
quotes/narratives/themes illustrate
o What can be learned from the findings?
 Concluding message
o What can be concluded from the study?
o What is the significance/need for their study and findings? What gap (in science,
practice or knowledge) does the research and findings address?
o What message do you want readers to take away from the research/findings?
o What are the implications for practice or further research?
o How do the findings relate to other research—what is novel/new? How do the
findings build on or add to what is known?
Resources
 Checklists for appraising research - Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) http://www.casp-
uk.net/#!casp-tools-checklists/c18f8.
 Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. (2011). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. SAGE.
 de Witt L & Ploeg J. (2006). Critical appraisal of rigour in interpretive phenomenological nursing
research. J Adv Nurs. 55(2):215-29
 Glaser BG. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence vs forcing. Mill Valley, CA:
Sociology press.
 Jeanfreau SG & Jack, L. Jr. (2010). Appraising Qualitative Research in Health Education:
Guidelines for Public Health. Educators Health Promot Pract. 11(5): 612–617. doi:
10.1177/1524839910363537
 Nicholas M & Pope C. (2000). Assessing quality in qualitative research. British Medical Journal,
International edition 320.7226: 50-2
 Schwandt TA, Lincoln YS & Guba EG. (2007). Judging interpretations. But is it rigorous?
Trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation.
114:11-25. doi: 10.1002/ev.223.
 Strauss A & Corbin J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory. 2nd ed: Sage Publications.
 4 major types of qualitative research. Available from Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. Retrieved 8th
February 2016 from: http://www.staff.blog.utm.my/pszresearchsupport/2011/09/19/4-major-
types-of-qualitative-research/
 The University of Warwick, Department of Sociology. ‘Research Process’. Retrieved 3rd March
2016 from: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/sociology/staff/hughes/researchprocess/

Qualitative Research Abstracts

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Qualitative Research Abstracts

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Qualitative Research Abstracts

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Qualitative Research Abstracts

 RCT Consort Abstract Guidelines

Qualitative research: What it is and what it isn’t

Selected Core characteristics Type of research question

Reliability and credibility of qualitative research

Generic criteria for evaluating the quality of qualitative research

1. Was there a clear statement of the aims of the research?

Writing an abstract for ICS about qualitative research

 Hypothesis / aims of study

 Study design, materials and methods

You might also like