The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Methodological challenges in qualitative content analysis: A discussion paper
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology.
Shelley, M., & Krippendorff, K. (1984) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2288384 · Cited by 24,312
The qualitative content analysis process
Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x · Cited by 22,617
Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001 · Cited by 20,772
Self-citationDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders(DSM)
(2008) · Encyclopedia of Counseling · doi:10.4135/9781412963978.n182 · Cited by 10,830
Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice
Schreier, M. (2012) · doi:10.4135/9781529682571 · Cited by 5,801
Sample size in qualitative research
Sandelowski, M. (1995) · Research in Nursing & Health · doi:10.1002/nur.4770180211 · Cited by 4,372
(1986) · Cited by 3,447
Content Analysis in Communication Research.
de Sola Pool, I., & Berelson, B. (1952) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2088029 · Cited by 3,099
Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach.
Harp, J., & Sayer, A. (1986) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2070081 · Cited by 2,603
Validity, trustworthiness and rigour: quality and the idea of qualitative research
Rolfe, G. (2006) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03727.x · Cited by 1,181
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Eriksson, 1999, Abduktion och pragmatism – två vägar till framsteg inom vårdvetenskapen, Hoitotiede, 11, 292
- Hörnsten, 2009, A lesson to learn – patients' critiques of diabetes nursing, Internet J. Adv. Nurs. Pract., 11
- Peirce, 1982, Vol. 5, 1884
- Rejnö, 2013, Strategies for handling ethical problems in sudden and unexpected death, Nurs. Ethics, 20, 708, 10.1177/0969733012473770 · doi:10.1177/0969733012473770
- Rolfe, 1997, Science, abduction and the fuzzy nurse: an exploration of expertise, J. Adv. Nurs., 25, 1070, 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1997.19970251070.x · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.1997.19970251070.x
Cited by
Kleinheksel, A. J., Rockich-Winston, N., Tawfik, H., & Wyatt, T. R. (2020) · American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education · doi:10.5688/ajpe7113 · Cited by 1,054
Petersson, L., Larsson, I., Nygren, J. M., Nilsen, P., Neher, M., Reed, J. E., Tyskbo, D., & Svedberg, P. (2022) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-022-08215-8 · Cited by 434
Theme in Qualitative Content Analysis and Thematic Analysis
Vaismoradi, M., & Snelgrove, S. R. (2019) · Forum qualitative Sozialforschung · doi:10.17169/fqs-20.3.3376 · Cited by 441
Quotations in Qualitative Studies: Reflections on Constituents, Custom, and Purpose
Eldh, A. C., Årestedt, L., & Berterö, C. (2020) · International Journal of Qualitative Methods · doi:10.1177/1609406920969268 · Cited by 362
Varasteh, S., Esmaeili, M., & Mazaheri, M. (2022) · International Nursing Review · doi:10.1111/inr.12718 · Cited by 95
Metadata
- Authors
- Graneheim, U. H., Lindgren, B.-M., & Lundman, B.
- Venue
- Nurse Education Today
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-09
- Volume
- 56
- Pages
- 29-34
- ISSN
- 0260-6917 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2721771326
- Cited by
- 3,195
- References
- 24
- FWCI
- 609.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Methodological challenges in qualitative content analysis: A discussion paper. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.nedt.2017.06.002
- The paper
- Graneheim, U. H., Lindgren, B.-M., & Lundman, B. (2017). Methodological challenges in qualitative content analysis: A discussion paper. Nurse Education Today. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2017.06.002
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
