The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Presenting and Evaluating Qualitative Research
Open accessAbstract
The purpose of this paper is to help authors to think about ways to present qualitative research papers in the American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. It also discusses methods for reviewers to assess the rigour, quality, and usefulness of qualitative research. Examples of different ways to present data from interviews, observations, and focus groups are included. The paper concludes with guidance for publishing qualitative research and a checklist for authors and reviewers.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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 cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In recent years, multiple publications have synthesized quality criteria and recommendations for use by researchers and peer reviewers alike, often in the form of checklists.[2][3][4][5][6]”
From A Review of the Quality Indicators of Rigor in Qualitative Research (2020) · cites this paper as [2]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Data collection and analysis biases may be observed based on the role of the researchers [54].”
From Acceptability of Web-Based Mental Health Interventions in the Workplace: Systematic Review (2022) · cites this paper as [54]
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
Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research
Robinson, P. M. (2007) · Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1111/j.1753-6405.2007.00096.x · Cited by 23,362
Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x033007014 · Cited by 11,170
Qualitative Research in Health Care
(2006) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470750841 · Cited by 2,747
Qualitative Research in Health Care
Pope, C. J., & Mays, N. (2019) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781119410867 · Cited by 1,171
Qualitative research methods in health technology assessment: a review of the literature.
Murphy, Dingwall, Greatbatch, Parker, & Watson (1998) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta2160 · Cited by 1,107
Kurtz, S. M., & Silverman, J. (1996) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.1996.tb00724.x · Cited by 525
Qualitative Research in Health Care
Webster, J. (2005) · Nursing Older People · doi:10.7748/nop.16.10.43.s21 · Cited by 334
Qualitative Research in Health Care
Alderson, P. (1996) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.312.7029.519a · Cited by 294
A-Z of qualitative research in healthcare
Holloway, I. (2008) · Wiley-Blackwell eBooks · Cited by 272
Austin, Z., Marini, A. E., Glover, N. M., & Croteau, D. R. (2005) · American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education · doi:10.5688/aj690104 · Cited by 93
Making sense of qualitative research: a new series
Britten, N. (2004) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.02024.x · Cited by 50
Assessment to Transform Competency-based Curricula
Farris, K. B., Demb, A., Janke, K. K., Kelley, K. A., & Scott, S. A. (2009) · American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education · doi:10.5688/aj7308158 · Cited by 28
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Greenhill N. An Exploration of Pharmacist-Patient Communication in Clinic-Style Consultations [doctoral thesis]. University of Nottingham, England; October 2010.
- Qualitative research. British Medical Journal Web site. http://resources.bmj.com/bmj/authors/checklists-forms/qualitative-research. Accessed August 31, 2010.
- Qualitative research review guidelines – RATS. BioMed Central. http://www.biomedcentral.com/info/ifora/rats Accessed August 31, 2010.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Thematic analysis of qualitative research data: Is it as easy as it sounds?
Castleberry, A., & Nolen, A. (2018) · Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning · doi:10.1016/j.cptl.2018.03.019 · Cited by 1,984
The pillars of trustworthiness in qualitative research
Ahmed, S. K. (2024) · Journal of Medicine Surgery and Public Health · doi:10.1016/j.glmedi.2024.100051 · Cited by 1,283
A Review of the Quality Indicators of Rigor in Qualitative Research
Johnson, J. L., Adkins, D., & Chauvin, S. (2020) · American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education · doi:10.5688/ajpe7120 · Cited by 2,076
“Still others have disseminated best practice guidelines through a series of methodological articles within journal publications.(2) In this article, attributes of rigor and quality and suggested best practices are presented as they relate to the steps of designing, conducting, and reporting qualitative research in a s…”
BackgroundThe Electronic Journal of e-Learning
(2023) · The Electronic Journal of e-Learning · doi:10.34190/ejel · Cited by 765
Theme in Qualitative Content Analysis and Thematic Analysis
Vaismoradi, M., & Snelgrove, S. R. (2019) · Forum qualitative Sozialforschung · doi:10.17169/fqs-20.3.3376 · Cited by 659
Metadata
- Authors
- Anderson, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Nottingham (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Anderson, Claire
- ORCID
- Anderson, Claire
- Venue
- American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-10
- Volume
- 74
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 141
- ISSN
- 0002-9459 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2987281
- OpenAlex
- W2079567258
- Semantic Scholar
- 5349b4a20b4a1052e13d82c6006b36d68c0000cc
- Cited by
- 1,188
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 40 · 2025: 69 · 2024: 110 · 2023: 111 · 2022: 114 · 2021: 118 · 2020: 110 · 2019: 111 · 2018: 104 · 2017: 96 · 2016: 67 · 2015: 61 · 2014: 38 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 54.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Academic Writing and Publishing
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Research and Methods
- Keywords
- qualitative research, research reporting, peer review, research rigor, data presentation, focus groups, observation, author guidelines, pharmacy education
- MeSH terms
- Data Interpretation, Statistical, Education, Pharmacy, United Kingdom, Interviews as Topic, Publishing, Reproducibility of Results, Focus Groups, Qualitative Research, Checklist
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
