Evidence-based Medicine Toolkit

Appraising qualitative studies 63one researcher to confirm they are both assigning the same meaningto them.Triangulation addresses the issue of internal validity by usingmore than one method of data collection to answer a researchquestion. Triangulation compares the results from either two ormore different methods of data collection (for example, interviewsand observation).Has the relationship between researchers andparticipants been adequately considered?a If the researchers critically examined their role, potential biasand influence?b Where the data were collected and why that setting was chosen?c How was the research explained to the participants?As well as exploration of alternative explanations for the datacollected, a long established tactic for improving the quality ofexplanations in qualitative research is to search for, and discuss,elements in the data that contradict, or seem to contradict, theemerging explanation of the phenomena under study. Such ‘deviantcase analysis’ helps refine the analysis until it can explain all orthe vast majority of the cases under scrutiny.The final technique is to ensure that the research design explicitlyincorporates a wide range of different perspectives so that theviewpoint of one group is never presented as if it represents thesole truth about any situation.Are the results credible, and if so, are they clinicallyimportant?One important aspect of the results section to check is whether theauthors cite actual data. The results should be independently andobjectively verifiable. A subject either made a particular statementor (s)he did not. All quotes and examples should be indexed so thatthey can be traced back to an identifiable subject and setting.What conclusions were drawn, and are they justified bythe results?When assessing the validity of qualitative research, to ask whetherthe interpretation placed on the data accords with common senseand is relatively untainted with personal or cultural perspective.