Cited by 1,423Qualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsQualitative Research Methods and EthicsMethodologies in Health Research and Practice

Qualitative descriptive methods in health science research

Open access
Colorafi, Karen Jiggins, Evans, Bronwynne·2016·HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this methodology paper is to describe an approach to qualitative design known as qualitative descriptive that is well suited to junior health sciences researchers because it can be used with a variety of theoretical approaches, sampling techniques, and data collection strategies. BACKGROUND: It is often difficult for junior qualitative researchers to pull together the tools and resources they need to embark on a high-quality qualitative research study and to manage the volumes of data they collect during qualitative studies. This paper seeks to pull together much needed resources and provide an overview of methods. METHODS: A step-by-step guide to planning a qualitative descriptive study and analyzing the data is provided, utilizing exemplars from the authors' research. RESULTS: This paper presents steps to conducting a qualitative descriptive study under the following headings: describing the qualitative descriptive approach, designing a qualitative descriptive study, steps to data analysis, and ensuring rigor of findings. CONCLUSIONS: The qualitative descriptive approach results in a summary in everyday, factual language that facilitates understanding of a selected phenomenon across disciplines of health science researchers.

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 · 10.1177/1937586715614171

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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Colorafi, K. J., & Evans, B.
Affiliations
Arizona State University (US)
Corresponding author
Colorafi, Karen Jiggins
Venue
HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal
Published
2016-01-19
Volume
9
Issue
4
Pages
16-25
ISSN
  • 1937-5867 (ISSN-L)
  • 2167-5112
OpenAlex
W2297459312
Cited by
1,423
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 201 · 2025: 203 · 2024: 204 · 2023: 180 · 2022: 214 · 2021: 167 · 2020: 108 · 2019: 74 · 2018: 50 · 2017: 20
FWCI
213.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • HERD Health Environments Research & Design Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Arizona State University
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Biodesign Institute, Arizona State University
  • National Institute of Nursing Research (T32NR012718, R01NR010541)
  • National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities
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 design, young researchers, data analysis, research rigor, learning planning, health research
MeSH terms
Data Collection, Humans, Research Design, Statistics as Topic, Qualitative Research

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