应用定性研究是否需要逐字记录:来自加纳两个社区干预试验的经验。

IF 3.6 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Zelee Hill, Charlotte Tawiah-Agyemang, Betty Kirkwood, Carl Kendall
{"title":"应用定性研究是否需要逐字记录:来自加纳两个社区干预试验的经验。","authors":"Zelee Hill,&nbsp;Charlotte Tawiah-Agyemang,&nbsp;Betty Kirkwood,&nbsp;Carl Kendall","doi":"10.1186/s12982-022-00115-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Conducting qualitative research within public health trials requires balancing timely data collection with the need to maintain data quality. Verbatim transcription of interviews is the conventional way of recording qualitative data, but is time consuming and can severely delay the availability of research findings. Expanding field notes into fair notes is a quicker alternative method, but is not usually recommended as interviewers select and interpret what they record. We used the fair note methodology in Ghana, and found that where research questions are relatively simple, and interviewers undergo sufficient training and supervision, fair notes can decrease data collection and analysis time, while still providing detailed and relevant information to the study team. Interviewers liked the method and felt it made them more reflective and analytical and improved their interview technique. The exception was focus group discussions, where the fair note approach failed to capture the interaction and richness of discussions, capturing group consensus rather than the discussions leading to this consensus.</p>","PeriodicalId":39896,"journal":{"name":"Emerging Themes in Epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9238251/pdf/","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are verbatim transcripts necessary in applied qualitative research: experiences from two community-based intervention trials in Ghana.\",\"authors\":\"Zelee Hill,&nbsp;Charlotte Tawiah-Agyemang,&nbsp;Betty Kirkwood,&nbsp;Carl Kendall\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12982-022-00115-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Conducting qualitative research within public health trials requires balancing timely data collection with the need to maintain data quality. Verbatim transcription of interviews is the conventional way of recording qualitative data, but is time consuming and can severely delay the availability of research findings. Expanding field notes into fair notes is a quicker alternative method, but is not usually recommended as interviewers select and interpret what they record. We used the fair note methodology in Ghana, and found that where research questions are relatively simple, and interviewers undergo sufficient training and supervision, fair notes can decrease data collection and analysis time, while still providing detailed and relevant information to the study team. Interviewers liked the method and felt it made them more reflective and analytical and improved their interview technique. The exception was focus group discussions, where the fair note approach failed to capture the interaction and richness of discussions, capturing group consensus rather than the discussions leading to this consensus.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39896,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Emerging Themes in Epidemiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9238251/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Emerging Themes in Epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12982-022-00115-w\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emerging Themes in Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12982-022-00115-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

在公共卫生试验中进行定性研究需要在及时收集数据与保持数据质量之间取得平衡。逐字抄写访谈是记录定性数据的传统方法,但耗时且会严重延迟研究结果的可用性。将现场笔记扩展为公平笔记是一种更快的替代方法,但通常不推荐面试官选择和解释他们的记录。我们在加纳使用了公平笔记方法,发现在研究问题相对简单,采访者接受了充分的培训和监督的情况下,公平笔记可以减少数据收集和分析时间,同时仍然为研究团队提供详细和相关的信息。面试官喜欢这种方法,认为这使他们更善于反思和分析,并提高了他们的面试技巧。唯一的例外是焦点小组讨论,其中公平说明方法未能捕捉到讨论的互动和丰富性,捕捉到小组共识,而不是导致这种共识的讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Are verbatim transcripts necessary in applied qualitative research: experiences from two community-based intervention trials in Ghana.

Conducting qualitative research within public health trials requires balancing timely data collection with the need to maintain data quality. Verbatim transcription of interviews is the conventional way of recording qualitative data, but is time consuming and can severely delay the availability of research findings. Expanding field notes into fair notes is a quicker alternative method, but is not usually recommended as interviewers select and interpret what they record. We used the fair note methodology in Ghana, and found that where research questions are relatively simple, and interviewers undergo sufficient training and supervision, fair notes can decrease data collection and analysis time, while still providing detailed and relevant information to the study team. Interviewers liked the method and felt it made them more reflective and analytical and improved their interview technique. The exception was focus group discussions, where the fair note approach failed to capture the interaction and richness of discussions, capturing group consensus rather than the discussions leading to this consensus.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Emerging Themes in Epidemiology
Emerging Themes in Epidemiology Medicine-Epidemiology
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.30%
发文量
9
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊介绍: Emerging Themes in Epidemiology is an open access, peer-reviewed, online journal that aims to promote debate and discussion on practical and theoretical aspects of epidemiology. Combining statistical approaches with an understanding of the biology of disease, epidemiologists seek to elucidate the social, environmental and host factors related to adverse health outcomes. Although research findings from epidemiologic studies abound in traditional public health journals, little publication space is devoted to discussion of the practical and theoretical concepts that underpin them. Because of its immediate impact on public health, an openly accessible forum is needed in the field of epidemiology to foster such discussion.
×
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