?Sekund?ranalyse qualitativer Daten: Ein ?berblick?. This paper provides an overview of secondary analysis of qualitative data, based on work examining the nature and use of the methodology in social research. It clarifies what secondary analysis is and how the methodology relates to other similar approaches used in qualitative research. It looks at the development of secon dary analysis in qualitative research, and some of the factors that have shaped this. And it examines the ways in which researchers have re-used qualitative data in published studies to date, describing which sources of data have been re-used, by whom and for what purposes. As well as reflecting on the ways in which researchers have so far utilized qualitative data in secondary studies, the paper also looks forward to some of the challenges that lie ahead.

Secondary analysis of qualitative data: an overview

Field notes are widely recommended in qualitative research as a means of documenting needed contextual information. With growing use of data sharing, secondary analysis, and metasynthesis, field notes ensure rich context persists beyond the original research team. However, while widely regarded as essential, there is not a guide to field note collection within the literature to guide researchers. Using the qualitative literature and previous research experience, we provide a concise guide to collection, incorporation, and dissemination of field notes. We provide a description of field note content for contextualization of an entire study as well as individual interviews and focus groups. In addition, we provide two "sketch note" guides, one for study context and one for individual interviews or focus groups for use in the field. Our guides are congruent with many qualitative and mixed methodologies and ensure contextual information is collected, stored, and disseminated as an essential component of ethical, rigorous qualitative research.

A Guide to Field Notes for Qualitative Research: Context and Conversation:

Evaluating meta ethnography: systematic analysis and synthesis of qualitative research (poster presentation)

Background: Methods for reviewing and synthesising findings from quantitative research studies in health care are well established. Although there is recognition of the need for qualitative research to be brought into the evidence base, there is no consensus about how this should be done and the methods for synthesising qualitative research are at a relatively early stage of development.Objective: To evaluate meta-ethnography as a method for synthesising qualitative research studies in health and health care.Methods: Two full syntheses of qualitative research studies were conducted between April 2002 and September 2004 using meta-ethnography: (1) studies of medicine-taking and (2) studies exploring patients? experiences of living with rheumatoid arthritis. Potentially relevant studies identified in multiple literature searches conducted in July and August 2002 (electronically and by hand) were appraised using a modified version of the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme questions for understanding qualitative research. Candidate papers were excluded on grounds of lack of relevance to the aims of the synthesis or because the work failed to employ qualitative methods of data collection and analysis.Results: Thirty-eight studies were entered into the medicine-taking synthesis, one of which did not contribute to the final synthesis. The synthesis revealed a general caution about taking medicine, and that the practice of lay testing of medicines was widespread. People were found to take their medicine passively or actively or to reject it outright. Some, in particular clinical areas, were coerced into taking it. Those who actively accepted their medicine often modified the regimen prescribed by a doctor, without the doctor?s knowledge. The synthesis concluded that people often do not take their medicines as prescribed because of concern about the medicines themselves. ?Resistance? emerged from the synthesis as a concept that best encapsulated the lay response to prescribed medicines. It was suggested that a policy focus should be on the problems associated with the medicines themselves and on evaluating the effectiveness of alternative treatments that some people use in preference to prescribed medicines. The synthesis of studies of lay experiences of living with rheumatoid arthritis began with 29 papers. Four could not be synthesised, leaving 25 papers (describing 22 studies) contributing to the final synthesis. Most of the papers were concerned with the everyday experience of living with rheumatoid arthritis. This synthesis did not produce significant new insights, probably because the early papers in the area were substantial and theoretically rich, and later papers were mostly confirmatory. In both topic areas, only a minority of the studies included in the syntheses were found to have referenced each other, suggesting that unnecessary replication had occurred.Limitations: We only evaluated meta-ethnography as a method for synthesising qualitative research, but there are other methods being employed. Further research is required to investigate how different methods of qualitative synthesis influence the outcome of the synthesis.Conclusions: Meta-ethnography is an effective method for synthesising qualitative research. The process of reciprocally translating the findings from each individual study into those from all the other studies in the synthesis, if applied rigorously, ensures that qualitative data can be combined. Following this essential process, the synthesis can then be expressed as a ?line of argument? that can be presented as text and in summary tables and diagrams or models. Meta-ethnography can produce significant new insights, but not all meta-ethnographic syntheses do so. Instead, some will identify fields in which saturation has been reached and in which no theoretical development has taken place for some time. Both outcomes are helpful in either moving research forward or avoiding wasted resources. Meta-ethnography is a highly interpretative method requiring considerable immersion in the individual studies to achieve a synthesis. It places substantial demands upon the synthesiser and requires a high degree of qualitative research skill. Meta-ethnography has great potential as a method of synthesis in qualitative health technology assessment but it is still evolving and cannot, at present, be regarded as a standardised approach capable of application in a routinised way.Funding: Funding for this study was provided by the Health Technology Assessment programme of the National Institute for Health Research.

/pdf/evaluating-meta-ethnography-systematic-analysis-and-3wwez9e6s4.pdf

Evaluating meta-ethnography: systematic analysis and synthesis of qualitative research.

The subjective nature of qualitative research necessitates scrupulous scientific methods to ensure valid results. Although qualitative methods such as grounded theory, phenomenology, and ethnography yield rich data, consumers of research need to be able to trust the findings reported in such studies. Researchers are responsible for establishing the trustworthiness of qualitative research through a variety of ways. Specific challenges faced in the field can seriously threaten the dependability of the data. However, by minimizing potential errors that can occur when doing fieldwork, researchers can increase the trustworthiness of the study. The purpose of this article is to present three of the pitfalls that can occur in qualitative research during data collection and transcription: equipment failure, environmental hazards, and transcription errors. Specific strategies to minimize the risk for avoidable errors will be discussed.

Avoiding Common Pitfalls in Qualitative Data Collection and Transcription

The purpose of this article is to identify the general methodologic and data set-specific challenges that must be overcome when attempting a secondary analysis of qualitative data Two separate examples of secondary analyses of qualitative data sets are also described, including one unsuccessful beginning

Ralph J. Vogel

Papers

The Possibilities and Pitfalls of Doing a Secondary Analysis of a Qualitative Data Set