Despite the persistent dominance of a 'scientific psychology' paradigm in health psychology, the use of qualitative research continues to grow. Qualitative approaches are often based on fundamentally different values from (post)positivistempiricism, raising important considerations for quality, and whether qualitative work adheres to, and is judged by, appropriate publication standards. Thematic analysis (TA) has become a particularly popular method in qualitative health psychology, but poor practice is widespread. To support high quality, methodologically coherent TA practice and reporting, we critically reviewed 100 systematically selected papers reporting TA, published in five prominent health psychology journals. Our review assessed reported practice, and considered this in relation to methodological and quality recommendations. We identified 10 common areas of problematic practice in the reviewed papers, the majority citing reflexive TA. Considering the role of three 'arbiters of quality' in a peer review publication system - authors, reviewers, and editors - we developed 20 recommendations for authors, to support them in conducting and reporting high quality TA research, with associated questions for reviewers and editors to consider when evaluating TA manuscripts for publication. We end with considerations for facilitating better qualitative research, and enriching the understandings and knowledge base from which health psychology is practiced.

Is thematic analysis used well in health psychology? A critical review of published research, with recommendations for quality practice and reporting.

Background The need for home care workers (HCWs) is rapidly growing in Norway due to the increasingly growing elderly population. HCWs are exposed to a number of occupational hazards and physically demanding work tasks. Musculoskeletal disorders, stress, exhaustion, high sick leave rates and a high probability of being granted a disability pension are common challenges. This qualitative study explored the views of HCWs on how working conditions affect their safety, health, and wellbeing. Methods A descriptive and explorative design was utilised using semi-structured individual interviews with eight HCWs from three home care units in a middle-sized Norwegian city. Interviews were conducted in the Norwegian language, audio-recorded, and transcribed verbatim. The data was analysed by systematic text condensation. Key data quotes were translated into English by the authors. Results HCWs reported that meaningful work-related interactions and relationships contributed to their improved wellbeing. Challenging interactions, such as verbal violence by consumers, were deemed stressful. The unpredictable work conditions HCWs encounter in users' homes contributed to their exposure to environmental hazards and unhealthy physical workloads. This was the case, although the employer promoted ergonomic work practices such as ergonomic body mechanics when mobilising and handling of clients, using safe patient handling equipment. HCWs perceived high level of individual responsibility for complying with company safety policies and practices, representing a health barrier for some. Organisational frameworks created unhealthy work conditions by shift work, time pressure and staffing challenges. Performing tasks in accordance with HCWs professional skills and identity was perceived as health-promoting. Conclusions This study suggests that unpredictable working conditions at users' home can adversely affect the safety, health, and wellbeing of HCWs. The interaction between the unpredictable environment at users' homes, HCWs' perceived high level of individual responsibility for complying with company safety policies and practices, and staffing challenges due to sickness-related absences upon the workplace creates tense work conditions with a negative influence on HCWs health.

/pdf/home-care-workers-experiences-of-work-conditions-related-to-50cyv0kwmk.pdf

Home care workers' experiences of work conditions related to their occupational health: a qualitative study.

Large scale, multi-organisational collaborations between researchers from diverse disciplinary backgrounds are increasingly recognised as important to investigate and tackle complex real-world problems. However differing expectations, epistemologies, and preferences across these teams pose challenges to following best practice for ensuring high-quality and rigorous qualitative research, while maintaining goodwill and team cohesion across team members. This article presents critical reflections from the real-world experiences of a team navigating the challenges of collaborating on a large-scale, cross-disciplinary interview study. Based on these experiences, we extend the literature on large team qualitative collaboration by highlighting the importance of balancing autonomy and collaboration, and propose eight recommendations to support high quality research and team cohesion. We identify how this balance can be achieved at different times: when centralised decision-making should be prioritised, and autonomy can be allowed. We argue that prioritising time to develop shared understandings, build trust, and creating positive environments that accept and support differing researcher perspectives on qualitative methods is paramount. By exploring and reflecting on these differences, teams can identify how and when to support autonomy in decision-making, when to move forward collaboratively, and how to ensure that shared processes reflect the needs of the whole team. The reflexive findings, emanating from practical experience, can inform large research teams undertaking qualitative studies to explore complex issues. We make an original contribution to qualitative methods research by arguing that balancing autonomy and collaboration is the key to promoting high quality research and cohesion in large teams.

Balancing Autonomy and Collaboration in Large-Scale and Disciplinary Diverse Teams for Successful Qualitative Research

In this article we outline how a team of qualitative researchers responded to the challenging circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic, describing how we successfully and speedily adopted remote/digital methods to research the experiences of hospital doctors. In 2020, we used Zoom to conduct qualitative interviews with 48 hospital doctors; in 2021, we used Zoom and WhatsApp to conduct a Mobile Instant Messaging Ethnography with 28 hospital doctors. We explain how we adapted to a virtual setting and provide clear insights (case study vignettes) into the additional demands on researchers and respondents, in particular, the impact on the research team. Finally, we analyse the positive and negatives of using remote qualitative methods and highlight the potential of hybrid data collection models that combine remote and face-to-face methods. We also highlight our success in communicating findings to a policy audience, important in time-critical situations, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/10497323221106294

‘Today Was Probably One of the Most Challenging Workdays I’ve Ever Had’: Doing Remote Qualitative Research with Hospital Doctors During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Healthcare is witnessing a new disease with the emergence of Long Covid; a condition which can result in myriad symptoms, varying in frequency and severity. As new data are emerging to help inform treatment guidelines, the perspectives of those living with Long Covid are essential in informing healthcare practice. The research aimed to collect the narratives of people living with Long Covid to better understand the lived experience of this condition. In attempting to narrate complex or traumatic experiences the arts and humanities can offer alternative ways of expressing embodied narratives, representing rich sources of meaning. Therefore, the research specifically sought to elicit creative expressions from participants with lived experience of Long Covid.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/hex.13602

Creative Long Covid: A qualitative exploration of the experience of Long Covid through the medium of creative narratives

Reflexivity constitutes a core component of qualitative research and has been actively integrated into long-term and "lone ranger" approaches to qualitative research. However, its application to team-based approaches and particularly to rapid qualitative team-based approaches continues to lag behind. In this article, we introduce a reflexivity model we developed for teams undertaking rapid qualitative studies. Utilizing our most recent application of this model to a rapid qualitative appraisal of health care workers' experiences delivering care during the COVID-19 pandemic as a case study, we identify the steps to put this model into practice and its main outcomes. Our application of the model revealed that the team's practices could be grouped along four dimensions: design assumptions, data collection and analysis processes, multidisciplinary collaboration, and responsible dissemination. Reflexivity can improve the relations within the team and the quality of the research output, if it is implemented as a continuous and iterative process.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1049732321998062

Examining What We Know in Relation to How We Know It: A Team-Based Reflexivity Model for Rapid Qualitative Health Research.

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Felicia Rankl

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Examining What We Know in Relation to How We Know It: A Team-Based Reflexivity Model for Rapid Qualitative Health Research.