Getting added value from using qualitative research with randomized controlled trials: a qualitative interview study

Trials

Jenny Hewison²  Anne Rudolph³  Kate J Thomas³  Sarah J Drabble³  Jackie Goode¹  Alicia O’Cathain³ 

[1] Visiting Research Fellow, Social Sciences Department, Loughborough University, Loughborough, Leicestershire LE11 3TU, UK;Psychology of Healthcare, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, 101 Clarendon Road, Leeds LS2 9LJ, UK;Health Services Research, Medical Care Research Unit, School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Regent Street, Sheffield S1 4DA, UK

关键词: Teams;    Randomized controlled trials;    Qualitative research;   

Others  :  805128
DOI  :  10.1186/1745-6215-15-215

 received in 2013-11-01, accepted in 2014-05-09,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Qualitative research is undertaken with randomized controlled trials of health interventions. Our aim was to explore the perceptions of researchers with experience of this endeavour to understand the added value of qualitative research to the trial in practice.

Methods

A telephone semi-structured interview study with 18 researchers with experience of undertaking the trial and/or the qualitative research.

Results

Interviewees described the added value of qualitative research for the trial, explaining how it solved problems at the pretrial stage, explained findings, and helped to increase the utility of the evidence generated by the trial. From the interviews, we identified three models of relationship of the qualitative research to the trial. In ‘the peripheral’ model, the trial was an opportunity to undertake qualitative research, with no intention that it would add value to the trial. In ‘the add-on’ model, the qualitative researcher understood the potential value of the qualitative research but it was viewed as a separate and complementary endeavour by the trial lead investigator and wider team. Interviewees described how this could limit the value of the qualitative research to the trial. Finally ‘the integral’ model played out in two ways. In ‘integral-in-theory’ studies, the lead investigator viewed the qualitative research as essential to the trial. However, in practice the qualitative research was under-resourced relative to the trial, potentially limiting its ability to add value to the trial. In ‘integral-in-practice’ studies, interviewees described how the qualitative research was planned from the beginning of the study, senior qualitative expertise was on the team from beginning to end, and staff and time were dedicated to the qualitative research. In these studies interviewees described the qualitative research adding value to the trial although this value was not necessarily visible beyond the original research team due to the challenges of publishing this research.

Conclusions

Health researchers combining qualitative research and trials viewed this practice as strengthening evaluative research. Teams viewing the qualitative research as essential to the trial, and resourcing it in practice, may have a better chance of delivering its added value to the trial.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 O’Cathain et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Bradley F, Wiles R, Kinmonth AL, Mant D, Gantley M: Development and evaluation of complex interventions in health services research: case study of the Southampton heart integrated care project (SHIP). Br Med J 1999, 318:711-715.
• [2]Sandelowski M: Using qualitative methods in intervention studies. Res Nurs Health 1996, 19:359-364.
• [3]O’Cathain A, Thomas KJ, Drabble SJ, Rudolph A, Hewison J: What can qualitative research do for randomised controlled trials? A systematic mapping review. Br Med J Open 2013, 3:e002889.
• [4]Creswell JW, Fetters MD, Plano Clark VL, Morales A: Mixed Methods Intervention Trials. In Mixed Methods Research for Nursing And The Health Sciences. Edited by Andrew S, Halcomb EJ. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell; 2009:161-180.
• [5]Flemming K, Adamson J, Atkin K: Improving the effectiveness of interventions in palliative care: the potential role of qualitative research in enhancing evidence from randomized controlled trials. Palliat Med 2008, 22:123-131.
• [6]Lewin S, Glenton C, Oxman AD: Use of qualitative methods alongside randomised controlled trials of complex healthcare interventions: methodological study. Br Med J 2009, 339:b3496.
• [7]Donovan J, Mills N, Smith M, Brindle L, Jacoby A, Peters T, Frankel S, Neal D, Hamdy F: Quality improvement report - improving design and conduct of randomised trials by embedding them in qualitative research: ProtecT (prostate testing for cancer and treatment) study. Br Med J 2002, 325:766-769.
• [8]Campbell M, Fitzpatrick R, Haines A, Kinmonth AL, Sandercock P, Spiegelhalter D, Tyrer P: Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. Br Med J 2000, 321:694-696.
• [9]Campbell NC, Murray E, Darbyshire J, Emery J, Farmer A, Griffiths F, Guthrie B, Lester H, Wilson P, Kinmonth AL: Designing and evaluating complex interventions to improve health care. Br Med J 2007, 334:455-459.
• [10]Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Mitchie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M: Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. Br Med J 2008, 337:a1655.
• [11]Rapport F, Storey M, Porter A, Snooks H, Jones K, Peconi J, Sánchez A, Siebert S, Thorne K, Clement C, Russell I: Qualitative research within trials: developing a standard operating procedure for a clinical trials unit. Trials 2013, 14:54. BioMed Central Full Text
• [12]Grant A, Treweek S, Dreischulte T, Foy R, Guthrie B: Process evaluations for cluster-randomised trials of complex interventions: a proposed framework for design and reporting. Trials 2013, 14:15. BioMed Central Full Text
• [13]Morgan-Trimmer S: Improving process evaluations of health behavior interventions: learning from the social sciences. Eval Health Prof 2013. doi: 10.1177/0163278713497363. Published online 23 September 2013
• [14]Hesse-Biber S: Weaving a multimethodology and mixed methods praxis into randomised control trials to enhance credibility. Qual Inq 2012, 18:876-889.
• [15]Plano Clark VL, Schumacher K, West C, Edrington J, Dunn LB, Harzstark A, Melisko M, Rabow MW, Swift PS, Miaskowski C: Practices for embedding an interpretive qualitative approach within a randomized clinical trial. J Mixed Methods Res 2013, 7:219-242.
• [16]O’Cathain A, Murphy E, Nicholl JP: Dysfunctional, multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary? Team working in mixed methods research. Qual Health Res 2008, 18:1574-1585.
• [17]O'Cathain A, Nicholl J, Murphy E: Structural issues affecting mixed methods studies in health research: a qualitative study. BMC Med Res Methodol 2009, 9:82. BioMed Central Full Text
• [18]O’Cathain A, Thomas KJ, Drabble SJ, Rudolph A, Goode J, Hewison J: Maximising the value of combining qualitative research and randomized controlled trials in health research: the QUAlitative Research in Trials (QUART) study – a mixed methods study. NIHR J Librin press
• [19]Richie J, Spencer L: Qualitative Data Analysis for Applied Policy Research. In Analysing Qualitative Data. Edited by Bryman A, Burgess RG. London, UK: Routledge; 1994:173-194.
• [20]Drabble SJ, O’Cathain A, Thomas KJ, Rudolph A, Hewison J: Describing qualitative research undertaken with randomised controlled trials in grant proposals: a documentary analysis. BMC Med Res Methodol 2014, 14:24. BioMed Central Full Text
• [21]Simons L: Moving from collision to integration. Reflecting on the experience of mixed methods. J Res Nurs 2007, 12:73-83.