Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 2,474

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Qualitative Research: Designing, Implementing, and Publishing a Study

Merriam, Sharan B.·2015·Advances in Knowledge Acquisition, Transfer, and Management

Abstract

This chapter takes the reader on a step-by-step journey through the process of conducting a qualitative research study using research conducted with Traditional Healers (THs) in Malaysia and how they diagnose and treat cancer. Upwards of 80% of Malaysians consult traditional healers before seeing a medical doctor, resulting in late-stage diagnoses and thus higher mortality rates. However, prior to our research, little was known about the role of healers and their willingness to work with, rather than outside, the Western medical system. Within this context, the theoretical framework, the specific research problem and the research questions were identified. Next, the author discusses purposive sampling and data collection strategies, which included interviews, documents, and observations. She then presents a data analysis exhibit showing how they captured specific data from the interviews to address the research questions. Finally, the author discusses writing and publishing the results of the research.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4018/978-1-4666-7409-7.ch007

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. B. G.Glaser, 1967, The discovery of grounded theory
  2. H. K.Heggenhougen, 1980, Bomohs, doctors and sinsehs—Medical pluralism in Malaysia., Social Science & Medicine, 148, 235
  3. Y. S.Lincoln, 1985, Naturalistic inquiry
  4. S. B.Merriam, 2009, Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation
  5. 10.1163/156853112X640152 · DOI
  6. 10.7314/APJCP.2013.14.6.3593 · DOI
  7. Muhamad, M., Merriam, S., & Suhami, N. (2012). Why breast cancer patients seek traditional healers. International Journal of Breast Cancer, Article ID 689168. doi: 10:1155/2012/689168 · DOI
  8. P.Parsa, 2006, Barriers for breast cancer screening among Asian women: A mini literature review., Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, 7, 509
  9. M.Patton, 2002, Qualitative research and evaluation methods
  10. 10.1177/002076400004600405 · DOI
  11. 10.1300/J010v46n02_02 · DOI
  12. P.Tovey, 2007, Traditional, complementary and alternative medicine and cancer care: An international analysis of grassroots integration, 10.4324/9780203007945 · DOI
  13. 2000, Collaboration with traditional healers in HIV/AIDS prevention and care in sub-Saharan Africa: A literature review
  14. 10.1016/j.amepre.2004.04.003 · DOI
  15. C. H.Yip, 2008, Epidemiology of breast cancer in Malaysia, Breast cancer in Malaysia: Issues and educational Implications, 1

Cited by

See all 2,474

Metadata

Authors
Merriam, S. B.
Venue
Advances in Knowledge Acquisition, Transfer, and Management
Publisher
IGI Global
Published
2015
Pages
125-140
ISSN
  • 2326-7607 (ISSN-L)
  • 2326-7615
OpenAlex
W2499471909
Cited by
2,474
References
1
FWCI
523.87
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Qualitative Research: Designing, Implementing, and Publishing a Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4018/978-1-4666-7409-7.ch007
The paper
Merriam, S. B. (2015). Qualitative Research: Designing, Implementing, and Publishing a Study. Advances in Knowledge Acquisition, Transfer, and Management. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-7409-7.ch007

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.