A Content Analysis of 100 Qualitative Health Research Articles to Examine Researcher-Participant Relationships and Implications for Data Sharing
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 2411299 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jessica Mozersky (0000-0002-4942-4571), Annie B Friedrich (0000-0001-6326-751X), James M Dubois (0000-0002-3712-7051) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 21 |
| Publication date | 2022-04-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Journal of Qualitative Methods (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1609-4069 • E-ISSN: 1609-4069 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/16094069221105074 |
| PMID | 38404360 |
| OpenAlex | W4285246262 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 31 |
We conducted a qualitative content analysis of health science literature ( N = 100) involving qualitative interviews or focus groups. Given recent data sharing mandates, our goal was to characterize the nature of relationships between the researchers and participants to inform ethical deliberations regarding qualitative data sharing and secondary analyses. Specifically, some researchers worry that data sharing might harm relationships, while others claim that data cannot be analyzed absent meaningful relationships with participants. We found little evidence of relationship building with participants. The majority of studies involve single encounters (95%), lasting less than 60 min (59%), with less than half of authors involved in primary data collection. Our findings suggest that relationships with participants might not pose a barrier to sharing some qualitative data collected in the health sciences and speak to the feasibility in principle of secondary analyses of these data
Alternative medicine · Content analysis · Data collection · Data sharing · Focus group · Harm · Qualitative property · Qualitative research · Social science · Sociology · Worry · Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection · Computer Science · Data Analysis and Archiving · Global Cancer Incidence and Screening · Medicine · Psychology · Social Psychology
Open Science Framework (OSF)
The Science of Team Science
How open science helps researchers succeed
Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science
Purposeful Sampling for Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis in Mixed Method Implementation Research
Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (Coreq)
The Interpretation of Cultures
Secondary Analysis of Archived Data
Is it time to share qualitative research data
A qualitative examination of barriers against effective medical education and practices related to breastfeeding promotion and support in Lebanon
Ethical Sharing and Reuse of Qualitative Data
Member Checking
Ethical Issues in the Reuse of Qualitative Data
Qualitative Methods in Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Blurring Boundaries in Qualitative Health Research on Sensitive Topics
Revisiting Qualitative Data Reuse
From data archive to ethical labyrinth
Qualitative Researchers' Understandings of Their Practice and the Implications for Data Archiving and Sharing
Whose Data are They Anyway
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,33 |
| Citation span | 2023 - 2026 (4) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |