The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Designing qualitative research
Open accessAbstract
Objectives: This study investigated the relationship between sleep quality during pregnancy and preterm birth. \nMethods: This longitudinal study was conducted between August 2018 and May 2019. The participants were 150 pregnant women who had been referred to 7 healthcare centers in the city of Qazvin, Iran and met the inclusion criteria. The Petersburg Sleep Quality Index, the Epworth Sleepiness Scale, and 2 questions about daytime sleep status and a demographic questionnaire were administered at 14-18 weeks and 28-32 weeks of gestation. Data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney test, the Fisher exact test, and univariate and multivariable logistic regression. \nResults: In the present study, poor sleep quality affected 84.7% of the participants at 14-18 weeks and 93.3% at 28-32 weeks of gestation. The final model for preterm birth prediction incorporated age and the Petersburg Sleep Quality Index score in the second and third trimesters. Preterm birth increased by 14% with each unit increase in age. With each unit increase in the Petersburg Sleep Quality Index score in the second and third trimesters, preterm birth increased by 42% and 28%, respectively, but the p-values of these factors were not significant. \nConclusions: Although a significant percentage of pregnant women had poor sleep quality, no significant relationship was found between sleep quality during pregnancy and preterm birth.
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.
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
Cited by
The qualitative content analysis process
Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x · Cited by 22,617
Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects
Shenton, A. K. (2004) · Education for Information · doi:10.3233/efi-2004-22201 · Cited by 9,748
Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research
Attride-Stirling, J. (2001) · Qualitative Research · doi:10.1177/146879410100100307 · Cited by 5,506
Quality and trustworthiness in qualitative research in counseling psychology.
Morrow, S. L. (2005) · Journal of Counseling Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.250 · Cited by 3,199
Understanding and Evaluating Qualitative Research
Fossey, E., Harvey, C., Mcdermott, F., & Davidson, L. (2002) · Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1046/j.1440-1614.2002.01100.x · Cited by 2,311
Metadata
- Venue
- Choice Reviews Online
- Publisher
- American Library Association
- Published
- 1989-10-01
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 02
- Pages
- 27-1232-27-1232
- ISSN
- 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-8253
- OpenAlex
- W1965516070
- Cited by
- 9,905
- References
- 0
- Type
- book review
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Designing qualitative research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.27-1232
- The paper
- Designing qualitative research. (1989). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.27-1232
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.