Cited by 57Qualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsHealth Policy Implementation ScienceEvaluation and Performance Assessment

Qualitative Methods and Process Evaluation in Clinical Trials Context: Where to Head to?

Open access
Cheng, Karis K. F., Metcalfe, Alison·2018·International Journal of Qualitative Methods

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1609406918774212

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cheng, K. K. F., & Metcalfe, A.
Affiliations
  • National University of Singapore (SG)
  • King's College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Cheng, Karis K. F.
Venue
International Journal of Qualitative Methods
Published
2018-04-30
Volume
17
Issue
1
ISSN
1609-4069 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2806154682
Cited by
57
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Qualitative Methods (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • National University of Singapore (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
Keywords
qualitative research, process evaluation, clinical trials, mixed methods

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