Cited by 111Qualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsQualitative Research Methods and EthicsMethodologies in Health Research and Practice

Critical reflections on the rise of qualitative research

Pope, C., Mays, N.·2009·BMJ

Abstract

Sixteen years ago Catherine Pope and Nicholas Mays were arguing for greater use of qualitative techniques in health research. Now they are concerned that the methods aren’t always used appropriately

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.b3425

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 Framework Method has often been conflated with a deductive approach to qualitative analysis.

    “Perhaps because the Framework Method is so obviously systematic, it has often, as other commentators have noted, been conflated with a deductive approach to qualitative analysis [13,14].”

    From Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research (2013) · cites this paper as [14]

    In “Critical reflections on the rise of qualitative research” (p. 3), Pope and Mays say Framework can sometimes be very deductive and contrast that with the inductive strength of qualitative analysis. They do not say that it has often been conflated with a deductive approach, or describe that association as a misconception. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 26 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [4]4. - Hodges BD, Kuper A, Reeves S. Discourse analysis. BMJ 2008; 337 :a879.
  2. [13]13. - Dingwall R. Do focus groups provide all the answers? J Health Serv Res Policy 1999; 4 :191.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pope, C., & Mays, N.
Affiliations
  • University of Southampton (GB)
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
Corresponding author
Pope, C.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2009-09-15
Volume
339
Issue
sep15 2
Pages
b3425-b3425
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2155988134
Cited by
111
References
26
Citations by year
2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 12
FWCI
56.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of Southampton
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Methodologies in Health Research and Practice
Keywords
qualitative research, health research methodology

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