Methodological and practical guidance for designing and conducting online qualitative surveys in public health.

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Samantha L Thomas, Hannah Pitt, Simone McCarthy, Grace Arnot, Marita Hennessy
{"title":"Methodological and practical guidance for designing and conducting online qualitative surveys in public health.","authors":"Samantha L Thomas, Hannah Pitt, Simone McCarthy, Grace Arnot, Marita Hennessy","doi":"10.1093/heapro/daae061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Online qualitative surveys-those surveys that prioritise qualitative questions and interpretivist values-have rich potential for researchers, particularly in new or emerging areas of public health. However, there is limited discussion about the practical development and methodological implications of such surveys, particularly for public health researchers. This poses challenges for researchers, funders, ethics committees, and peer reviewers in assessing the rigour and robustness of such research, and in deciding the appropriateness of the method for answering different research questions. Drawing and extending on the work of other researchers, as well as our own experiences of conducting online qualitative surveys with young people and adults, we describe the processes associated with developing and implementing online qualitative surveys and writing up online qualitative survey data. We provide practical examples and lessons learned about question development, the importance of rigorous piloting strategies, use of novel techniques to prompt detailed responses from participants, and decisions that are made about data preparation and interpretation. We consider reviewer comments, and some ethical considerations of this type of qualitative research for both participants and researchers. We provide a range of practical strategies to improve trustworthiness in decision-making and data interpretation-including the importance of using theory. Rigorous online qualitative surveys that are grounded in qualitative interpretivist values offer a range of unique benefits for public health researchers, knowledge users, and research participants.</p>","PeriodicalId":54256,"journal":{"name":"Health Promotion International","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11200187/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Promotion International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daae061","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Online qualitative surveys-those surveys that prioritise qualitative questions and interpretivist values-have rich potential for researchers, particularly in new or emerging areas of public health. However, there is limited discussion about the practical development and methodological implications of such surveys, particularly for public health researchers. This poses challenges for researchers, funders, ethics committees, and peer reviewers in assessing the rigour and robustness of such research, and in deciding the appropriateness of the method for answering different research questions. Drawing and extending on the work of other researchers, as well as our own experiences of conducting online qualitative surveys with young people and adults, we describe the processes associated with developing and implementing online qualitative surveys and writing up online qualitative survey data. We provide practical examples and lessons learned about question development, the importance of rigorous piloting strategies, use of novel techniques to prompt detailed responses from participants, and decisions that are made about data preparation and interpretation. We consider reviewer comments, and some ethical considerations of this type of qualitative research for both participants and researchers. We provide a range of practical strategies to improve trustworthiness in decision-making and data interpretation-including the importance of using theory. Rigorous online qualitative surveys that are grounded in qualitative interpretivist values offer a range of unique benefits for public health researchers, knowledge users, and research participants.

设计和开展公共卫生在线定性调查的方法和实用指南。
在线定性调查--那些优先考虑定性问题和解释主义价值观的调查--对研究人员来说具有巨大的潜力,尤其是在公共卫生的新领域或新兴领域。然而,关于此类调查的实际发展和方法论影响的讨论却很有限,尤其是对公共卫生研究人员而言。这给研究人员、资助者、伦理委员会和同行评审人员在评估此类研究的严谨性和稳健性,以及决定该方法是否适合回答不同的研究问题时带来了挑战。我们借鉴并扩展了其他研究人员的工作以及我们自己对年轻人和成年人进行在线定性调查的经验,描述了与开发和实施在线定性调查以及撰写在线定性调查数据相关的过程。我们提供了有关问题开发、严格的试点策略的重要性、使用新技术促使参与者做出详细回答以及有关数据准备和解释的决策等方面的实例和经验教训。我们考虑了审稿人的意见,以及这类定性研究对参与者和研究人员的一些伦理考虑。我们提供了一系列实用策略,以提高决策和数据解释的可信度--包括使用理论的重要性。基于定性阐释主义价值观的严格在线定性调查为公共卫生研究人员、知识使用者和研究参与者提供了一系列独特的益处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Health Promotion International
Health Promotion International Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
7.40%
发文量
146
期刊介绍: Health Promotion International contains refereed original articles, reviews, and debate articles on major themes and innovations in the health promotion field. In line with the remits of the series of global conferences on health promotion the journal expressly invites contributions from sectors beyond health. These may include education, employment, government, the media, industry, environmental agencies, and community networks. As the thought journal of the international health promotion movement we seek in particular theoretical, methodological and activist advances to the field. Thus, the journal provides a unique focal point for articles of high quality that describe not only theories and concepts, research projects and policy formulation, but also planned and spontaneous activities, organizational change, as well as social and environmental development.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信