The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 3 of the 25 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing researcher
Open accessAbstract
This article discusses good practice in thematic analysis and common problems researchers should avoid when conducting and reporting thematic analysis.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This commentary reviews 20 thematic analysis (TA) papers published in the *International Journal of Transgender Health* that cite the authors' own TA work, and distils guidance for producing methodologically coherent TA. It argues that good TA practice requires researchers to understand which approach within the TA "family" they are using, to align procedures with underlying research values, and to treat themes as meaning-based interpretive stories rather than topic summaries.
Key findings
- The reviewed papers mostly reported qualitative studies (the remainder mixed methods), typically using interviews, focus groups or qualitative surveys, and mostly took an experiential orientation focused on transgender people's lived experience, underpinned by realist or critical realist ontology; a minority used TA within a critical orientation.
- Three recurring problems are identified: unacknowledged diversity within TA (some papers referred to a "standardised TA"), confusion between themes-as-meaning-unified-interpretive-stories and themes-as-topic-summaries, and incomplete ownership of the researcher's perspective.
- Methodological "mash-ups" were common — e.g. combining reflexive TA with consensus coding, intercoder agreement, codebook development, or positivist notions of researcher bias alongside Big Q reflexivity — usually without justification.
- Two papers are singled out as good practice examples: Fraser et al. (2021), which reported two meaning-based themes ("proving gender" and "the trans narrative"), and Frohard-Dourlent et al. (2020), which reported three themes and seven sub-themes on surgical readiness assessments and gave a clear thematic structure table plus an account of the analytic process.
Methods
- Commentary based on the authors' critical review of 20 papers published in IJTH that cite their work, most commonly Braun and Clarke (2006), with most authors claiming to have "followed" their approach and a minority citing it while using other approaches.
- The authors situate TA as a family of methods, using a typology of coding reliability, codebook, reflexive TA and thematic coding, and drawing on the small q/Big Q qualitative distinction (Kidder & Fine, 1987; Finlay, 2021) to analyse coherence between procedures and research values.
- The commentary closes with ten recommendations for researchers and reviewers rather than presenting new empirical data.
Limitations
- The authors state they deliberately do not list the reviewed papers, to avoid "naming and shaming," and reference examples of poor practice only in general terms (Note 1).
- The authors note that they do identify by name two papers exemplifying good practice, so the review is illustrative rather than a systematic or exhaustive sample.
- Evident from the text: the review covers only 20 papers from a single journal, and the authors are commenting on use of their own approach, so the snapshot is field- and method-specific rather than generalisable.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
15 No full text of the sources · 12 Own interpretation · 7 Own result · 7 No basis given · 2 Sources not found · 2 Not checked yet · 1 Supported · 1 Supported so far · 1 Couldn’t confirm · accuracy not yet measured
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Codebook approaches to TA-such as framework (Gale et al., 2013) or template (King & Brooks, 2018) analysis-combine some of the more structured procedures of coding reliability TA 3 with some of the qualitative research values of reflexive TA.”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Gale et al., 2013 source
Gale et al. describe the Framework Method as combining structured coding with flexibility and reflexive qualitative analysis. Stages 3–5 describe independent coding, an agreed set of codes, and systematic application of the framework; the Background calls for critical reflection and reflexive notes. The citation supports framework analysis as the example in the sentence. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites King & Brooks, 2018 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most exemplified an experiential orientation to qualitative research, with a focus on the lived experience and perspectives of transgender folx (and some interest in the views of others, such of parents of transgender adolescents), or the factors that influence and contextualize certain behaviors and choices, underpinned by a realist or critical realist ontology.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We were heartened that some researchers in the field of transgender health are also using TA to interrogate the social construction of meaning within a critical orientation to qualitative research”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were several examples in the papers we reviewed of researchers using Big Q reflexive TA approach and procedures, with conceptually incoherent additions, such as small q consensus coding and measuring intercoder agreement, or adding a codebook development/recoding the data phase, or referencing both positivist notions of researcher bias and Big Q notions of reflexivity, or expressing concern”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
In the paper
“However, reflexivity rarely extended beyond this more personal framing (Wilkinson, 1988).”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > (Not) owning one's perspective
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wilkinson, 1988 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“But these conceptualisations often don't map onto what happens in practice.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Telling meaning-united stories or summarizing topics?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
In the paper
“Big Q researchers typically conceptualize mind-dependent truths, rather than a mind-independent truth (Tebes, 2005).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tebes, 2005 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we don't think it fulfils all of the requirements of a methodology because it doesn't inherently provide researchers with a theoretically-informed framework for research.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Notes
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Unlike methodologies such as grounded theory or discourse analysis, TA offers few directives around philosophical and theoretical positioning, appropriate research questions, data collection methods, or the size or constitution of the participant group/dataset (see Braun & Clarke, 2022a).”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Notes
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Braun & Clarke, 2022a source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“whether saturation is a meaningful concept for reflexive TA (TL; DR no it isn't!; Braun & Clarke, 2021b)”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Everything changes…
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Braun & Clarke, 2021b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
- Probably not a substantial claim. 33
- It may state two separate claims as one. 15
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Frohard-Dourlent et al. (2020) explored experiences of surgical readiness assessments in Canada and reported three themes and seven sub-themes”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Telling meaning-united stories or summarizing topics?
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Frohard-Dourlent et al., 2020 source
The Abstract and Results report a thematic analysis of interviews about surgical readiness assessments in British Columbia, Canada, and identify three main themes. The Results organize the discussion under seven sub-themes: three concerning gatekeeping, two concerning barriers to care, and two concerning assessments as useful. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
- Supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Researchers cannot coherently be both a descriptive scientist and an interpretative artist (Finlay, 2021).”
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites Finlay, 2021 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The indexed copy’s Abstract says thematic analysis can be systematic or intuitive and lists both rigour and resonance as evaluation criteria. It does not address whether a researcher can coherently be both a descriptive scientist and an interpretative artist; searches for that phrase and for scientific–artistic incompatibility found no decisive passage. (LLM, conf=0.70)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Could not verify
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most papers reported qualitative studies-with the rest mixed-method designs-typically based on interview, focus group or qualitative survey data.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
In the paper
“Frohard-Dourlent et al. also provide an example of a clear overview of the thematic structure (in the form of a table), and a brief but effective account of the authors' analytic process and engagement with reflexive TA, both important elements of a high-quality TA report (Braun & Clarke, 2022b).”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Telling meaning-united stories or summarizing topics?
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Braun & Clarke, 2022b source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The papers we reviewed exemplified both good and bad practice with regard to researchers striving to own their perspective.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > (Not) owning one's perspective
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both problems-positivism creep, and the use of topic summary themes in reflexive TA-were evident in the papers we reviewed.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Telling meaning-united stories or summarizing topics?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All included some kind of statement of the researchers' personal positioning and/or professional experience with regard to gender identity, which is particularly important when researching socially minoritized groups and when researchers may be more socially powerful and privileged outsiders.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > (Not) owning one's perspective
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
In the paper
“One paper justified the use of grounded theory coding techniques to do TA on the grounds that Braun and Clarke (2006) don't provide a plan for doing TA.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Notes
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Braun & Clarke, 2006 source
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two of the reviewed papers provided clear examples of themes as meaning-based interpretative stories.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Telling meaning-united stories or summarizing topics?
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Assessment were also conversely experienced as positive by some, with participants feeling supported by the assessor and prepared for the next steps.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Telling meaning-united stories or summarizing topics?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similar to experiences reported by Fraser et al., participants often experienced the assessment process as aversive gatekeeping, with health professionals having the power to deny access to care, and compel conformity to an archetypal and outdated binary trans narrative.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Telling meaning-united stories or summarizing topics?
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TA was occasionally described as a methodology in the papers reviewed”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Notes
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Assessments were experienced as difficult to access because of opaqueness, bureaucracy and a lack of socio-economic privilege.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Telling meaning-united stories or summarizing topics?
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
In the paper
“Our approach, which we now call reflexive TA to acknowledge the plurality of TA and better distinguish it from other approaches (see Braun & Clarke, 2019), is an example of a Big Q or non-positivist qualitative approach”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Braun & Clarke, 2019 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“we have developed a typology of similar approaches, which we designate coding reliability, codebook and reflexive TA, and thematic coding”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Braun & Clarke, 2022b source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“it was more common before TA was widely recognized as a distinct method.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Flick, 2018
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Rivas, 2018
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, thematic coding involves the use of grounding theory coding procedures to develop themes from data.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Reflexive TA approaches embrace researcher subjectivity as a resource for research (rejecting positivist notions of researcher bias, see Varpio et al., 2021), view the practice of TA as inherently subjective, emphasize researcher reflexivity, and reject the notion that coding can ever be accurate-as it is an inherently interpretative practice, and meaning is not fixed within data.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Varpio et al., 2021 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Our thinking around TA has evolved since 2006, including now using the specific name reflexive TA (Braun & Clarke, 2019).”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Everything changes…
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Braun & Clarke, 2019 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Topic summaries as themes are common in coding reliability and some codebook TA, and thematic coding; themes in reflexive, and some codebook, TA are conceptualized as meaning-based, interpretative stories.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Telling meaning-united stories or summarizing topics?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The key to selecting methodologically coherent quality standards and tools is knowing practice-reasoning through the assumptions embedded in particular concepts and practices.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > (Not) owning one's perspective
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The practice requires depth of engagement, thinking creatively and reflexively about the data, an intensive and organic coding process designed to parse out different facets of data meaning, and to help the researcher move beyond the most obvious or superficial meanings in the data.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Telling meaning-united stories or summarizing topics?
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“We originally stated that reflexive TA could be underpinned by (simple) realism (Braun & Clarke, 2006), but we now think the Big Q research values of reflexive TA make a simple or naive realist reflexive TA a tricky proposition.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > (Not) owning one's perspective
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Braun & Clarke, 2006 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“Tracy (2010) highlighted the concept of member reflections as a Big Q alternative to member checking, which is not about verification, or accessing truth or reality.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > (Not) owning one's perspective
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tracy, 2010 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By contrast, themes as interpretative stories built around uniting meaning cannot be developed in advance of analysis.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Telling meaning-united stories or summarizing topics?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The procedures we and other TA methodologists have developed are thought-through manifestations of underlying research values”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We say closer to because the procedures and conceptualisations of key concepts associated with different iterations of TA reflect particular underlying paradigmatic assumptions or research values.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Notes
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Luckily, qualitative methodologists have already done a lot of the heavy lifting here (e.g., Braun & Clarke, 2021b;Smith & McGannon, 2018;Varpio et al., 2017Varpio et al., , 2021)), presenting thoughtful considerations of what's assumed and at stake in various supposedly universal criteria.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > (Not) owning one's perspective
What the sources say
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Reflexive TA is premised on the researcher always shaping their research; it will always be infused with their subjectivity, and they are never a neutral conduit, simply conveying a directly-accessed truth of participants' experience.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > (Not) owning one's perspective
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Simply put, topic summaries make no conceptual sense in reflexive TA, and the procedures have been designed to support the development of deep understanding and the telling of interpretative stories about meanings (sometimes obvious, sometimes subtle) that cut across a dataset and capture an important aspect of whatever you are trying to understand!”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Telling meaning-united stories or summarizing topics?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This practice in theory controls for or corrects any subjective bias-misinterpretation, misemphasis-of the researcher (Smith & McGannon, 2018).”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > (Not) owning one's perspective
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Smith & McGannon, 2018 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because TA is better understood as closer to a method than a methodology, and because of its theoretical flexibility, it's vital that researchers locate their use of TA theoretically”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > (Not) owning one's perspective
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“Given that the purpose of our 2006 paper was precisely to do that, and it was the first place we outlined a clear six-phase approach to reflexive TA-and critiqued the use of grounded theory techniques to do TA”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Notes
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Braun & Clarke, 2006 source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, the use of member checking is infused with assumptions about reality and knowledge production that sit (conceptually) uncomfortably with reflexive TA-including that there is a truth of participants' experiences that we can access if we can keep the potentially distorting effects of researcher influence in check (see Smith & McGannon, 2018).”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > (Not) owning one's perspective
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Smith & McGannon, 2018 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TA cannot be conducted in a theoretical vacuum-researchers inescapably bring in assumptions about the nature of reality, about what constitutes meaningful knowledge and knowledge production, and what their data represent or give them access to, even if these are not discussed.”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > (Not) owning one's perspective
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They contain diversity, but they have a central idea that unifies the diversity”
§ Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing > Telling meaning-united stories or summarizing topics?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
The 20 papers reviewed are a sufficient and valid basis for identifying common problems in TA research published in IJTH.
“This commentary is based on a review of 20 papers published in IJTH citing our work”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Unthinking compliance with the RTARG will not necessarily improve reporting quality, because knowing practice is key.”
From Supporting best practice in reflexive thematic analysis reporting in Palliative Medicine : A review of published research and introduction to the Reflexive Thematic Analysis Reporting Guidelines (RTARG) (2024) · cites this paper as [7]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Coding complex domains such as personal strength or relating to others involves a degree of researcher subjectivity, as these categories are not fixed entities but are instead co-constructed through the interaction between the participant’s narrative and the researcher’s interpretive lens [53].”
From The coexistence and trajectories of posttraumatic growth and depreciation: a 36-month longitudinal qualitative narrative analysis (2026) · cites this paper as [53]
In the citing paper
“We recognize that this composition concentrated our analytic gaze and that our shared identity as health professions education scholars predisposed us to read the data through a competency and curriculum lens. We treated these orientations as interpretive resources rather than biases to be eliminated [16], discussing them explicitly during analytic meetings to question candidate themes.”
From Role-Differentiated AI Competencies and Curriculum Implications for Health Professions Education: Qualitative Study (2026) · cites this paper as [16]
In the citing paper
“Sample size was determined through iterative monitoring of analytic stabilization—sometimes termed data saturation, though we use this term cautiously given the constructivist orientation of reflexive thematic analysis [16]—rather than a prespecified target.”
From Role-Differentiated AI Competencies and Curriculum Implications for Health Professions Education: Qualitative Study (2026) · cites this paper as [16]
Citations
Cites
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa · Cited by 194,414
Self-citationReflecting on reflexive thematic analysis
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019) · Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health · doi:10.1080/2159676x.2019.1628806 · Cited by 19,677
Self-citationGale, N. K., Heath, G., Cameron, E., Rashid, S., & Redwood, S. (2013) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-13-117 · Cited by 10,865
One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis?
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238 · Cited by 9,727
Self-citationQualitative Quality: Eight “Big-Tent” Criteria for Excellent Qualitative Research
Tracy, S. J. (2010) · Qualitative Inquiry · doi:10.1177/1077800410383121 · Cited by 7,536
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022) · Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-69909-7_3470-2 · Cited by 5,890
Self-citationThematic Analysis: A Practical Guide
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022) · QMiP Bulletin · doi:10.53841/bpsqmip.2022.1.33.46 · Cited by 5,438
Self-citationBraun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021) · Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health · doi:10.1080/2159676x.2019.1704846 · Cited by 4,776
Self-citationConceptual and design thinking for thematic analysis.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022) · Qualitative Psychology · doi:10.1037/qup0000196 · Cited by 4,502
Self-citationBraun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021) · Counselling and Psychotherapy Research · doi:10.1002/capr.12360 · Cited by 3,198
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Finlay L., 2021, European Journal for Qualitative Research in Psychotherapy,, 11, 103
- Hayes N., 2000, Doing psychological research: Gathering and analyzing data
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 2,201–2,300 of 2,869
Reconceptualising Educational Assumptions in a Creative Pedagogy Summer School, Palestine
Al-Yamani, H., Alsawayfa, F., Arya‐Manesh, E., et al. (2026) · Creativity, education and the arts. · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-05412-8_3
Walker, S., Smyth, L., Aggio‐Bruce, R., & Chong, J. J. S. (2026) · Journal of Further and Higher Education · doi:10.1080/0309877x.2026.2669515
Kopaczek-Styczen, M., Berglund, E., Nordberg, M., et al. (2026) · European Journal of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1097/mej.0000000000001352
Capacitismo Afetivo-Sexual e a disputa pela legitimidade do desejo autista nas redes sociais
Marinho, R. J. S., & Cúnico, S. D. (2026) · RELIES Revista del Laboratorio Iberoamericano para el Estudio Sociohistórico de las Sexualidades · doi:10.46661/relies.13192
Advancing the understanding of the human dimensions of Eurasian lynx reintroduction in Scotland
Whiley, F. L., Ingram, D. J., Fish, R. D., MacMillan, D. C., & Tzanopoulos, J. (2026) · Conservation Science and Practice · doi:10.1111/csp2.70312 · Cited by 1
“This six-phase framework was undertaken by the primary author and member checking, where the co-authors reflected on the analysis, enhanced the credibility of the coding (Braun & Clarke, 2023).”
Tayfur, B., Morrissey, D., & Miller, S. (2026) · Journal of Sport Rehabilitation · doi:10.1123/jsr.2025-0387
Fischer, D. (2026) · Qualitative Social Work · doi:10.1177/14733250261451974 · Cited by 1
Adolescent perspectives on mental health and an arts-based philosophical inquiry interventionPreprint
Benny, V., Stout, D., Bernier, M., Marchand, A., Fry, Z. D., Yobé, V., Michaud, O., & Malboeuf‐Hurtubise, C. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-9368328/v1
McClellan, L., Emezue, C., Reed, M., Schroeder, K., & Ruppar, T. M. (2026) · Global Qualitative Nursing Research · doi:10.1177/23333936261448868
“Using this foundation, we recommend codebook thematic analysis (Bingham, 2023; Braun & Clarke, 2022a) as a flexible yet structured method suited to the hybrid data that GVIv produces, recognizing the importance of understanding the perspectives of those with lived experiences through their eyes…”
Sundqvist, J. (2026) · Nordic Journal of Studies in Policing · doi:10.18261/njsp.13.1.6
Acceptability of Stop It Now! Australia: perceptions of service users, police and practitioners
McKibbin, G., Kuruppu, J., Humphreys, C., et al. (2026) · Journal of Sexual Aggression · doi:10.1080/13552600.2026.2659697
Defante, K., & Sanderson, A. (2026) · Psychology and Sexuality · doi:10.1080/19419899.2026.2671409
Xu, M., Lo, S. H. S., Zhu, L., & Huang, X. (2026) · BMC Geriatrics · doi:10.1186/s12877-026-07610-8
“We followed the six steps described in reflexive thematic analysis [28], focusing on the reflexivity for cross-sectional analysis, based on the recommendation of Braun and Clark on Big Q [29, 30].”
Chasima, T., Caes, L., Kalumbi, L. R., Kambalame, L., Chamba, M. V. M., Price, H., & Uny, I. (2026) · International Journal of Qualitative Methods · doi:10.1177/16094069261439752
Ghezzi, M., & Garvis, S. (2026) · Early Childhood Education Journal · doi:10.1007/s10643-026-02222-8
Lane, R., Taylor, H., Melzak, S., Rushworth, I., Beigi, M., & Chiu, K. (2026) · Transcultural Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/13634615261435699
“The six phases of RTA outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006, 2022) were employed to synthesise and interpret interview data, working across and between the phases in an iterative manner until the fi ndings were written up.”
Theron, L., & Muller, J. (2026) · Journal of Child Sexual Abuse · doi:10.1080/10538712.2026.2673330
“As part of the process and meeting the quality criteria of credibility, the authors recorded their reflections on the data and the analytical process, recognizing their active involvement in data production (Braun & Clarke, 2023).”
Closet Capitalism – A New Form of Deterritorialization in Pakistan
Noorani, I., & Hussain, M. (2025) · Pakistan Journal of Gender Studies · doi:10.46568/pjgs.v25i1.813
Whelan, C., Ryan, L., Gomez, J., & Daly, E. (2026) · Journal for the Study of Sports and Athletes in Education · doi:10.1080/19357397.2026.2668990
Norris, L. A., Didymus, F. F., & Kaiseler, M. (2026) · Journal of Applied Sport Psychology · doi:10.1080/10413200.2026.2671105
Personal and Vicarious Overdose Experiences Among People Who Co-Use Stimulants and Opioids
Evans, J. L., Winter, C., Denney, M. R., Olarewaju, O. K., Genberg, B. L., & German, D. (2026) · Substance Use & Misuse · doi:10.1080/10826084.2026.2650810
“We used a qualitative lifecourse approach (Elder, 1994; Giele & Elder, 1998; Neale, 2015) combined with iterative thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2023) (2)Factors mediating whether emotional impact leads to changes in drug use. then reexamined to identify sub-themes related to overdose impact,…”
Responsibly adopting workplace mental well-being platforms
Gentry, E., Vallejos, E. P., Greenhalgh, C., Dowthwaite, L., & Bryce, V. (2026) · Journal of Responsible Technology · doi:10.1016/j.jrt.2026.100168
Heuer, J. N., Kalvesmaki, A., Matson, S., Waslo, C. S., Panahi, S., George, R. T., & Pugh, M. J. (2026) · Medical Care Research and Review · doi:10.1177/10775587261445776
“However, reflexivity is crucial during analysis, as additional, relevant, key themes and codes may be identified as the data are reviewed (Braun & Clarke, 2023; Keniston et al., 2023).”
Bilbrough, C., Forbes, R., Costa, N., & Dinsdale, A. (2026) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2026.109690 · Cited by 1
Едуардівна, Л. Ю., & Weyer, H. (2026) · Springer international handbooks of education · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-10711-4_29-1
Bernal, A. N., Löyttynen, J., Sangiorgi, D., & Hammar, L. M. (2026) · Frontiers in Dementia · doi:10.3389/frdem.2026.1814577
“These discussions, together with wider analytic meetings, functioned as peer debriefing rather than inter-coder reliability testing (Braun and Clarke, 2022).”
Disruptive Artificial Intelligence Technologies in Automated Self Service Digital Platforms.
Winji, L., Kashuware, B., Chidoko, C., & Magoso, M. N. (2026) · Journal of Management Sciences Innovation and Technology · doi:10.63726/jmsit.v2i1.350
“…the systematic identification, organisation, and interpretation of recurring patterns and themes within the data, allowing researchers to uncover the core concepts, underlying meanings, and critical insights that emerge from participants’ narratives and experiences (Braun and Clarke, 2022).”
Unda, J., Munene, F., Kagwanja, N., Jones, C., & Mwangome, M. (2026) · Maternal and Child Nutrition · doi:10.1111/mcn.70202
Munangatire, T., Tomas, N., KEMBA, H., et al. (2026) · Clinical Simulation in Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.ecns.2026.101975
Basra, N., & Monteiro, A. L. (2026) · Psychiatry Psychology and Law · doi:10.1080/13218719.2026.2647811
Fishbein, D., Aung, H. T., Ong, R., Nyein, A., Kyaw, Z. L., Karenni, E., Jie, J., Maw, K., Khant, K., Poe, A., et al. (2026) · medRxiv · doi:10.64898/2026.05.15.26352743
Budde, J. B., Nordentoft, S., Haslund-Vinding, J. L., Mathiesen, T. I., Køster, A., Fernandez, A., Guldager, R., & Maier, A. D. (2026) · Neuro-Oncology Practice · doi:10.1093/nop/npag041
Whiffin, C. J., Ellis‐Hill, C., Norman, A., Lee, M., Singh, P., Holloway, M., Clark-Wilson, J., Yasmin, N., Rose, S., Sheffield, D., et al. (2026) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0349304
“Analytical rigour was grounded in a ‘Big Q’ approach commensurate with a qualitative paradigm [41].”
Tillij, J., & Wickenberg, B. (2026) · Frontiers in Sustainable Cities · doi:10.3389/frsc.2026.1829299
Kadji‐Beltran, C., Kyriakou, N., & Eteokleous, N. (2026) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su18105055
Andreassen, M., Törnqvist, T., & Österholm, J. (2026) · BMC Geriatrics · doi:10.1186/s12877-026-07637-x
Lupton, D., & Bailey‐Charteris, B. (2026) · Environmental Communication · doi:10.1080/17524032.2026.2673346
Fallaha, M. A., Fairclough, S., Javaid, A., & Satheesan, K. S. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-9546052/v1
Braddish, S., Houghton, S., Ruane‐McAteer, E., & Fortune, D. G. (2026) · Journal of Health Psychology · doi:10.1177/13591053261446886
Dale, I., Diggs, A., Esposito, M., et al. (2026) · Journal of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (JIAPAC) · doi:10.1177/23259582261451971
“A thematic approach 24,25 guided data analysis using an iterative coding process supported by team-based consensus.”
Promoting Oversight and Accountability in Metropolitan Governance
Sukhessan-Dawson, N., & Hendrickse, R. (2026) · Administratio publica. · doi:10.61967/adminpub.2026.34.1.4
One size does not fit all: Adaptive Mentorship in South African Primary Teacher Education
Jiyane, L., & Manditereza, B. (2026) · Journal of Education and Learning Technology · doi:10.38159/jelt.20267226
Alang, T., Nguyen, N. T. T., & Tôn, H. N. N. (2026) · British Food Journal · doi:10.1108/bfj-10-2025-1373 · Cited by 1
Tailored profiles of physical activity in children with asthma: Insights from a mixed methods study
Lin, N., Sun, Y., Jin, J., et al. (2026) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2026.105575
Improving ALS Clinic Care Through Experience‐Based Co‐Design: A Participatory Action Research Study
Mehta, A. K., Steele, S. U., Shah, I. O., Wang, K. P., Booth, A., Swain, C., Desai, A., Popli, K., Maragakis, N. J., & Wright, R. (2026) · Muscle & Nerve · doi:10.1002/mus.70279
Brooker, J., & Jenks, E. (2026) · Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs · doi:10.1111/1471-3802.70108
Glazbrook, M. R., Webb, S. N., & Cleland, J. (2026) · Qualitative Research in Sport Exercise and Health · doi:10.1080/2159676x.2026.2676996
Eddy, T. W., Gee, S., Millar, P., et al. (2026) · Managing Sport and Leisure · doi:10.1080/23750472.2026.2675959
Elliott, S. A., Cyrkot, S., Scott, S. D., et al. (2026) · BMJ Paediatrics Open · doi:10.1136/bmjpo-2025-004197
Wang, H., Lyu, X., Wang, X., et al. (2026) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12916-026-04945-2
“The focus group data were analysed using Braun and Clarke’s reflexive thematic analysis (RTA) [34, 35].”
Exploring a Structured Social Year Wheel for Belonging in Higher EducationPreprint
Sørensen, Y., Bjørndal, K. E. W., & Bjerknes, A. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-9302981/v1
Azimi, A., Moshtagh, Z., Bahramabadi, M. Z., et al. (2026) · Sex Education · doi:10.1080/14681811.2026.2677750
Kier-Byfield, S., Wallace, S., Underwood-Lee, E., et al. (2026) · Journal of Interpersonal Violence · doi:10.1177/08862605261444659
“The overall approach to the analysis takes inspiration from reflexive thematic analysis (RTA), and we have aimed to be “knowing” in our approach (Braun & Clarke, 2022).”
Nolan, K. T., & Xenofontos, C. (2026) · Mathematics Education Research Journal · doi:10.1007/s13394-026-00577-0
The 4IR in nursing education and its implications for theory-practice integration: A scoping review
Mahlatsi, K. S., Makhene, A., Pienaar, A. J., & Moeta, M. (2026) · International Journal of Africa Nursing Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ijans.2026.101098
Brumpton, K., Evans, R., Gupta, T. S., et al. (2026) · Australian Journal of Primary Health · doi:10.1071/py25245
Human Capital Management Strategies in Zion Royal Theatre
Oki, O. J., & Olajide, M. (2026) · African Journal of Management and Business Research · doi:10.62154/ajmbr.2026.022.01024
Hong, Y., Kong, D., Lu, Y., et al. (2026) · BMC Psychology · doi:10.1186/s40359-026-04841-7
“Data analysis was conducted manually, following the procedural steps outlined by Braun and Clarke [20, 21].”
Brún, J. D., & Duibhir, P. Ó. (2026) · Irish Educational Studies · doi:10.1080/03323315.2026.2675302
Pre-Service Teacher perceptions of Professional Experience in Australia: a scoping review
Mainsbridge, C. P., Larsen, S. A., & Plessis, A. E. D. (2026) · Research Papers in Education · doi:10.1080/02671522.2026.2677158
Dastgahian, E. S. (2026) · The Australian Educational Researcher · doi:10.1007/s13384-026-00981-2
Finding Meaning in Medication Management in Dementia
Feder, S. L., David, D., & Schulman‐Green, D. (2026) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2026.1568
Iftikhar, S., Peter, S., Banham, V. F., & Boyd, E. R. (2026) · The International Journal of Community and Social Development · doi:10.1177/25166026261448749
Kenis, D., Devos, I., Hens, K., et al. (2026) · Journal of Bioethical Inquiry · doi:10.1007/s11673-025-10533-5
Annang, A., Mensah, R. O., Frimpong, A., & Opoku, D. (2026) · Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies · doi:10.1155/hbe2/2457361
Kauppi, W., Hedman, K., Söderholm, H. M., et al. (2026) · BMC Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12873-026-01620-w
“The interviews were analyzed using the reflexive thematic analysis process described by Braun and Clarke [28, 38, 39].”
Rethinking Qualitative Inquiry With AI
Wibowo, W., Amima, A. F., Ashari, N. R., et al. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-7640-0.ch009
Dubey, S., Takahashi, B., Smit, E. G., Smit, E. S., Thaker, J. J., & Meijers, M. H. C. (2026) · Global Perspectives in Communication · doi:10.1093/gpcomm/wpag006
An emerging AI4Academia model: exploring the ethical implications of GenAI in higher education
Hendal, B. A. (2026) · Information Discovery and Delivery · doi:10.1108/idd-01-2026-0024
Inspirational Labor and the Affective Economy of Women’s Soccer Fandom
Chahardovali, T., McLeod, C. M., & Hawzen, M. (2026) · Sociology of Sport Journal · doi:10.1123/ssj.2025-0146
Fihla, S., & Gavaza, B. K. (2026) · Administrative Sciences · doi:10.3390/admsci16060258
“Thematic analysis was employed for data analysis as it allows the researcher to locate, code, and interpret regularities across the data in a consistent manner (Braun & Clarke, 2023; Gavaza, 2025).”
InfluentialLived Experiences of Women Victims of Gender-Based Violence in South Africa: A Qualitative Study
Madutlela, B. I., & Letsoalo, D. L. (2026) · Social Sciences · doi:10.3390/socsci15060352
Desafíos y Limitaciones de la Ciudadanía Digital en América Latina
Sulca-Aquije, G. M., & Chocobar-Reyes, E. J. (2026) · Revista Docentes 2 0 · doi:10.37843/rted.v19i1.772
School principals’ perspectives on professional development needs and proposed solutions
Beyaz, A., & Günbey, M. (2026) · Kocaeli Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi · doi:10.33400/kuje.1737088
Illuminating a joyless life: qualitative, transdiagnostic exploration of anhedonia
Edwards, C. J., Osei-Cobbina, C., Duerden, A., Sirey, N., Bassi, V., Agunbiade, A., Cella, M., Dunn, B. D., & Gumley, A. I. (2026) · BJPsych Open · doi:10.1192/bjo.2026.12004
“Thematic analysis was applied to reflexively understand the data, 19,20 with representation of the range of perspectives included in the study.”
Ohta, R., Yata, A., & Sano, C. (2026) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare14111527
“Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis, guided by Braun and Clarke’s six-phase framework [15–17].”
Children’s Wellbeing Perspectives at Age 10–11 years: A Participatory Research Approach
Peters, S., McLaughlin, M., & Davison, J. (2026) · Child Indicators Research · doi:10.1007/s12187-026-10390-7
“In this current study, summative content analysis of the factors and the frequency of drawings in Table 2 was used to indicate the consistency of the sub-theme, rather than assuming analytical importance, which Braun and Clarke (2022) approve as a caveat.”
Ziyud, A., Al-Thelaya, K., & Schneider, J. (2026) · Societies · doi:10.3390/soc16060179
Grønlie, A. A., Backer‐Grøndahl, A., Nes, R. B., & Tømmerås, T. (2026) · Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research · doi:10.1007/s10488-026-01511-z · Cited by 1
Adis, N. S., & Zolkefli, Y. (2026) · INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARE SCHOLARS · doi:10.31436/ijcs.v9i2.470
“This final phase involved producing the analytic narrative , where themes were interpreted within existing literature , alongside discussion of implications , limitations and conclusions aligned with the research aims (17).”
Murphy, K., Gardner, F. E. M., Kirwa, S., Kiptui, R., Christine, L., Puffer, E. S., Ruggiero, E. D., Kimani, S., O’Gara, R., Okal, E. O., et al. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-9500444/v1
Yuill, C., Scamell, M., & Foya, V. (2026) · Midwifery · doi:10.1016/j.midw.2026.104887
Bernuzzi, C., Piccardo, M. A., Civitarese, G., Bettini, C., Arighi, A., Galimberti, D., Florio, G., & Guglielmetti, C. (2026) · Safety Science · doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2026.107303
Anand, A., Lindong, I., & Barrett, S. E. (2026) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph23060745
“The review followed best practices for transparency and rigor in narrative synthesis, informed by Braun and Clarke’s reflexive thematic analysis framework [27].”
Near-Peer Teaching to Integrate Anatomical Imaging into the Medical School Curriculum
Warfield, A. E., Plante, C. A., Walsh, R., et al. (2026) · Medical Science Educator · doi:10.1007/s40670-026-02760-1
Gali, A. M., & Heil, D. (2026) · Open Journal of Business and Management · doi:10.4236/ojbm.2026.144092
Toumaras, N. (2026) · Environment and Planning C Politics and Space · doi:10.1177/23996544261459092
Røkkum, N. H. A., & Moufack, M. F. (2026) · Socialvetenskaplig tidskrift · doi:10.64098/svt.2025.32.55877
Gawlewicz, A., Piekut, A., Gilmour, M., & Wright, S. (2026) · International Journal of Housing Policy · doi:10.1080/19491247.2026.2673656
Mireku, D. A., Mensah, R. O., & Opoku, D. (2026) · International Journal of Sexual Health · doi:10.1080/19317611.2026.2679169
The Challenges of AI Applications in Health Care: Qualitative Study
Qiu, L., Li, S., Liang, Y., Lu, S., & Tao, P. (2026) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/92979 · Cited by 1
“Data analysis was conducted following the principles of reflexive thematic analysis by Braun and Clarke [9]; updated guidance from Braun and Clarke [10] was also adopted, prioritizing interpretive credibility and analytic confirmability rather than positivist reliability measures.”
Hazan‐Liran, B., Labes, M., & Levkovich, I. (2026) · Social Work With Groups · doi:10.1080/01609513.2026.2682133
“The data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach based on the framework developed by Braun and Clarke (2023).”
Li, P. W. C., & Chan, B. S. Y. (2026) · Geriatric Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.gerinurse.2026.104119
Comment les jeunes qui ont transitionné socialement uniquement vivent leur détransition ?
Lambert, N., Gelly, M. A., & Sansfaçon, A. P. (2026) · Enfances Familles Générations · doi:10.7202/1125790ar
The Experience of Depression in Older Adults With Cancer: A Qualitative Descriptive Analysis
Hardt, M. M., Gilliland, J. L., Rubi, L., Dolma, R., Saracino, R. M., Sirey, J. A., & McConnell, K. M. (2026) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.70512
‘Do You Know what I Mean?’: Rhizomatic Biographies and Unbelievable Stories in Trauma Narratives
Astley, T., Lhussier, M., Bilby, C., Cooper, C., Kirton, A., & Riley, F. (2026) · International Review of Qualitative Research · doi:10.1177/19408447261458288
Sperduti, V. R., Yemini, M., Engel, L., & Stahl, G. (2026) · Children & Society · doi:10.1111/chso.70050
When stigma hits home: A mixed methods study of affiliate stigma among epilepsy care partners
Prieto, S., Larracey, E. T., Hernandez‐Vallant, A., Rahilly, M., Goldstein, A., Kaden, S. J., Tremont, G. N., Kiriakopoulos, E. T., Davis, J., & Margolis, S. A. (2026) · Epilepsy & Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2026.111148
de Oliveira, M. A., Otani, M. A. P., Vernasque, J. R. D. S., et al. (2026) · Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP · doi:10.1590/1980-220x-reeusp-2026-0016es
de Oliveira, M. A., Otani, M. A. P., Vernasque, J. R. D. S., et al. (2026) · Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP · doi:10.1590/1980-220x-reeusp-2026-0016pt
Metadata
- Authors
- Braun, V., & Clarke, V.
- Affiliations
- University of Auckland (NZ)
- University of the West of England (GB)
- Venue
- International Journal of Transgender Health
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2022-10-25
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-6
- ISSN
- 2689-5269 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC9879167
- OpenAlex
- W4307217168
- Semantic Scholar
- e28e41b67cfbb817d70b90cfab5436d012bb58ea
- Cited by
- 2,878
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1230 · 2025: 1016 · 2024: 486 · 2023: 123 · 2022: 8
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal of Transgender Health (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
- Keywords
- thematic analysis, best practices, qualitative research methodology, mixed methods, research quality
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
