Paul Gill

Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups

This paper explores the most common methods of data collection used in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups. The paper examines each method in detail, focusing on how they work in practice, when their use is appropriate and what they can offer dentistry. Examples of empirical studies that have used interviews or focus groups are also provided.

Analysing and presenting qualitative data

This paper provides a pragmatic approach to analysing qualitative data, using actual data from a qualitative dental public health study for demonstration purposes. The paper also critically explores how computers can be used to facilitate this process, the debate about the verification (validation) of qualitative analyses and how to write up and present qualitative research studies.

Qualitative research in dentistry.

This paper is the first in a series of four that provides an overview of the key elements of qualitative research. In particular, it discusses issues such as what qualitative research is, when its use is appropriate, what it can offer dentistry and approaches to data collection and analysis. Where appropriate, examples of dental studies that have used qualitative methods are also provided for practical purposes.

Stressors and coping mechanisms in live-related renal transplantation

AIM To explore donor and recipient experiences of stressors and coping mechanisms associated with live-related renal transplantation. BACKGROUND Live-related renal transplantation is an effective and efficient treatment for end-stage kidney disease, but is also associated with a variety of stressors. DESIGN Longitudinal, phenomenological study. METHODS Eleven live kidney donors and their recipients (n = 22) were recruited from a regional renal transplant centre in South-West England. Data were collected through three recorded, semi-structured interviews, conducted pretransplant and at three and 10 months post-transplant. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, analysed using a process of thematic analysis and validated through a constructive process of inter-rater reliability. RESULTS End-stage kidney disease, dialysis and live transplantation produced a variety of stressors for donors and recipients. Common stressors included the live transplantation decision-making process, the prospect of surgery and postoperative recovery, follow-up care for donors and, in particular, concern for each other, especially amongst recipients. The main stressor, however, was fear of transplant failure. Participants used a variety of problem- and emotion-focused coping mechanisms to deal with these stressors and donors and recipients actively supported each other through the transplantation process. CONCLUSION Renal transplantation remains the treatment of choice for most patients with end-stage kidney disease but is a source of considerable stress for donors and especially recipients and subsequently requires a range of coping mechanisms, including social support. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE Patients need to be adequately informed of the risks associated with transplantation and provided with appropriate emotional care and support throughout the transplantation process. Health professionals also need to be mindful of assessing the needs and managing realistic expectations of patients and their families.

Conducting qualitative interviews with school children in dental research.

This paper explores when and how to conduct qualitative research with children in dentistry, using research interviews as a method of data collection. Methodological guidance is also provided, based on research and a recent dental public health study in which 74 children from Years 2 (6-7-year-olds) and 6 (10-11-year-olds) were interviewed about their understanding of and attitudes to food.

Understandings about food among 6-11 year olds in South Wales

Abstract This paper details a qualitative study which explored how 6–11 year olds in Cardiff, Wales, think about information they receive about food and nutrition, and how this affects preferences and practices. Seventy-four children from four local primary schools participated in semi-structured one-to-one interviews. The data indicate that in both age groups: (1) Children operate contradictions about food effortlessly, incorporating notions of “bad” and “good” relating to food and its health and social consequences. (2) Information about food is drawn on inconsistently and selectively in different social environments. (3) Children operate singular notions of the health consequences of food: for example, sugar rots teeth, fat affects weight. (4) Peer influence is strong, with conforming behavior in both age groups and sexes. (5) Eating is an age-isolated activity and concept—children copy each other at school and make individualized choices at home, moderated rather than determined by parents.

Culture, communication and nursing

Introduction Chapter 1: Thinking about culture Chapter 2: Communication, nursing and culture Chapter 3: Communication skills Chapter 4: Culture and communication in Thai nursing: an example of a different culture Chapter 5: Learning culture Chapter 6: Beliefs and religion Chapter 7: Cultural pitfalls, advice on working in the UK and culture and stress in nursing Chapter 8: Developing cultural awareness Glossary References

Research governance: Has it become a research hindrance?

Appropriate research governance is an essential element of any research endeavour, particularly where patients are involved. The research governance framework for health and social care was implemented into the UK in 2001, with the aim of improving research quality and safeguarding the public by enhancing the ethical and scientific quality of research (DoH, 2001). Initially setting a quality benchmark perhaps to be envied by other countries, the process has degenerated into something much less worthy of imitation.

Time to end the vagaries of PhD examining

Doctoral education has proliferated significantly in recent years, particularly in nursing, as building research capacity has been a priority. There has also been an increase in the range of doctorates available, including traditional PhD by research, professional doctorates and PhD by publication and/or portfolio. Consequently, PhD examination is now a relatively common feature of higher education in the UK (Tinkler and Jackson, 2004). Whilst there are international variations, PhD examination in the UK is in two stages; submission and assessment of a thesis followed by oral examination (viva). Doctoral examination is normally conducted by at least two suitably qualified examiners; one internal and one external, although this may vary for PhD students who are also members of staff in the host institution. In many Universities the viva is also facilitated by an ‘independent chair’ (normally an experienced academic with examining experience), who does not take part in the examination as such; but is there to ensure fairness and consistency and to provide academic and/or institutional advice and support, where appropriate. However, whilst British PhDs have undergone considerable changes over the last decade, (much of which has been informed by the UK Research Councils) particularly in relation to research and supervision training and support, the examination of the PhD has escaped comparable critical scrutiny (Tinkler and Jackson, 2004). Unlike taught undergraduate and postgraduate degrees, the PhD itself lacks any agreed, formalised assessment criteria and the entire process is largely based on the [subjective] academic judgement of the respective examiners. This anachronistic approach is questionable at best and would probably not hold up to public scrutiny.