Background. Qualitative research explores complex phenomena encountered by clinicians, health care providers, policy makers and consumers. Although partial checklists are available, no consolidated reporting framework exists for any type of qualitative design. Objective. To develop a checklist for explicit and comprehensive reporting of qualitative studies (indepth interviews and focus groups). Methods. We performed a comprehensive search in Cochrane and Campbell Protocols, Medline, CINAHL, systematic reviews of qualitative studies, author or reviewer guidelines of major medical journals and reference lists of relevant publications for existing checklists used to assess qualitative studies. Seventy-six items from 22 checklists were compiled into a comprehensive list. All items were grouped into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Duplicate items and those that were ambiguous, too broadly defined and impractical to assess were removed. Results. Items most frequently included in the checklists related to sampling method, setting for data collection, method of data collection, respondent validation of findings, method of recording data, description of the derivation of themes and inclusion of supporting quotations. We grouped all items into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Conclusions. The criteria included in COREQ, a 32-item checklist, can help researchers to report important aspects of the research team, study methods, context of the study, findings, analysis and interpretations.

Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups

Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques

The detection of psychiatric illness by questionnaire

Using a process model of emotion, a distinction between antecedent-focused and response-focused emotion regulation is proposed. To test this distinction, 120 participants were shown a disgusting film while their experiential, behavioral, and physiological responses were recorded. Participants were told to either (a) think about the film in such a way that they would feel nothing (reappraisal, a form of antecedent-focused emotion regulation), (b) behave in such a way that someone watching them would not know they were feeling anything (suppression, a form of response-focused emotion regulation), or (c) watch the film (a control condition). Compared with the control condition, both reappraisal and suppression were effective in reducing emotion-expressive behavior. However, reappraisal decreased disgust experience, whereas suppression increased sympathetic activation. These results suggest that these 2 emotion regulatory processes may have different adaptive consequences.

/pdf/antecedent-and-response-focused-emotion-regulation-divergent-vs5od848ei.pdf

Antecedent- and response-focused emotion regulation: Divergent consequences for experience, expression, and physiology.

The topic of emotions in the workplace is beginning to garner closer attention by researchers and theorists. The study of emotional labor addresses the stress of managing emotions when the work role demands that certain expressions be shown to customers. However, there has been no overarching framework to guide this work, and the previous studies have often disagreed on the definition and operationalization of emotional labor. The purposes of this article are as follows: to review and compare previous perspectives of emotional labor, to provide a definition of emotional labor that integrates these perspectives, to discuss emotion regulation as a guiding theory for understanding the mechanisms of emotional labor, and to present a model of emotional labor that includes individual differences (such as emotional intelligence) and organizational factors (such as supervisor support).

/pdf/emotion-regulation-in-the-workplace-a-new-way-to-3wsayvojfk.pdf

Emotion regulation in the workplace: a new way to conceptualize emotional labor.

Effects of physical exercise on anxiety, depression, and sensitivity to stress: a unifying theory.

Assessing the quality of qualitative research.

Objectives: To describe, from the perspective of patients, distinguishing features of doctors9 attempts to explain the symptoms of somatisation disorders. Design: Qualitative analysis of verbatim records of interviews in which patients recounted doctors9 explanations of their symptoms. Setting: Patients with persistent somatising symptoms referred from general practices in Liverpool and St Helens and Knowsley were interviewed before entry into a treatment programme. Subjects: 228 of 324 patients referred were interviewed. Initial interviews were used to develop the process and technique, and the final analysis was based on a subsample of 68 records, randomly chosen from the transcripts of 188 subjects who were interviewed subsequently. Results: Doctors9 explanations were often at odds with the patients9 own thinking. Analysis showed that medical explanations could be grouped into one of three categories, defined by the patients9 perceptions. Most explanations were experienced as rejecting the reality of the symptoms. An intermediate category comprised explanations that were viewed as colluding, in which the doctor acquiesced with the patients9 own biomedical theories. However, a few explanations were perceived by patients as tangible, exculpating, and involving. These explanations were experienced by patients as satisfying and empowering. Conclusions: Patients with somatisation disorders feel satisfied and empowered by medical explanations that are tangible, exculpating, and involving. Empowering explanations could improve these patients9 wellbeing and help to reduce the high demands they make on health services.

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/318/7180/372.full.pdf

Patients' perceptions of medical explanations for somatisation disorders: qualitative analysis.

Objective To determine how patients with breast cancer want their doctors to communicate with them.

Design Qualitative study.

Setting Breast unit and patients' homes.

Participants 39 women with breast cancer.

Main outcome measure Patients' reports of doctors' characteristics or behaviour that they valued or deprecated.

Results Patients were not primarily concerned with doctors' communication skills. Instead they emphasised doctors' enduring characteristics. Specifically, they valued doctors whom they believed were technically expert, had formed individual relationships with them, and respected them. They therefore valued forms of communication that are currently not emphasised in training and research and did not intrinsically value others that are currently thought important, including provision of information and choice.

Conclusions Women with breast cancer seek to regard their doctors as attachment figures who will care for them. They seek communication that does not compromise this view and that enhances confidence that they are cared for. Testing and elaborating our analysis will help to focus communication research and teaching on what patients need rather than on what professionals think they need.

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/328/7444/864.full.pdf

Doctors' communication of trust, care, and respect in breast cancer: qualitative study

The somatising effect of clinical consultation: what patients and doctors say and do not say when patients present medically unexplained physical symptoms.

Peter Salmon

Papers

Effects of physical exercise on anxiety, depression, and sensitivity to stress: a unifying theory.

Assessing the quality of qualitative research.

Patients' perceptions of medical explanations for somatisation disorders: qualitative analysis.

Doctors' communication of trust, care, and respect in breast cancer: qualitative study

The somatising effect of clinical consultation: what patients and doctors say and do not say when patients present medically unexplained physical symptoms.