Characteristics of the Phenomenological Interview in Healthcare Research

A Scoping Review and Practical Guidance

Bibliographic Data

ID16819404
AuthorsJoaquim Oliveira Lopes (0000-0003-2571-7078), Florinda Galinha de Sá (0000-0002-4523-1721), Maria Teresa Magão (0000-0003-0294-3590), Joaquim Paulo Oliveira (0000-0003-0057-316X), Patrícia Silva-Pereira (0000-0002-9686-1002), Marianne E Klinke (0000-0003-1887-8623), Margarida Tomás (0000-0001-8047-3489)
Year2025
Volume24
Publication date2025-09-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueInternational Journal of Qualitative Methods (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1609-4069 • E-ISSN: 1609-4069
PublisherSAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/16094069251381018
LanguageEN
References cited56

The interview is essential and the most dominant method for data collection in phenomenological health research. Since several practical guides and best practice examples can be found in the scientific literature, the present review aims to map the nature and use of interviews in phenomenological healthcare research, focusing on their application, characteristics, and theoretical underpinnings. This review adhered to Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for scoping reviews and utilised the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. Eligible studies included those with a phenomenological or phenomenological-oriented approach employing interviews for data gathering. A systematic search across CINAHL, MEDLINE, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, and MedicLatina identified 125 studies published by December 2022. Data were extracted and analysed using calibrated forms, followed by a narrative synthesis and tabular presentation. Findings reveal a predominance of hermeneutic or interpretive phenomenology, with most studies employing in-depth, semi-structured, or unstructured interviews to explore topics such as chronic health conditions, caregiving, mental health, and professional experiences. Patients were the most frequently studied population (55%), with nurses and midwives accounting for 82% of first authors. Despite the alignment with phenomenological goals, significant gaps were identified: 60% of studies lacked explicit theoretical frameworks for interviews, raising concerns about methodological rigour and coherence. Reflexive practices, participant validation, and triangulation were employed to address interviewer subjectivity and enhance credibility. However, inconsistencies in applying phenomenological principles were evident, with some studies mixing methods or deviating from foundational philosophies. This review underscores the transformative potential of phenomenological interviews in healthcare research while highlighting significant methodological gaps. Future studies should prioritise integrating theoretical foundations and rigorously applying phenomenological principles to enhance the exploration of lived experience and advance the field. Based on authors and more consensual practices, some practical recommendations for conducting phenomenological interviews are presented

Tools

Open DOI