Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Table 3 Quality Assessment of Included Studies - qualitative studies

From: Where do we stand? The availability and efficacy of diabetes related foot health programs for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians: a systematic review

Articles Health Evidence Bulletins - Wales: Additional questions to assist with the critical appraisal of a qualitative study. Schoen [25] Watson [26]
A. What is this paper about? 1. Is the study relevant to the needs of the project? Y Y
2. Does the paper address a clearly focussed issue? Are the aims of the investigation clearly stated? Y Y
B. Do I trust it? 3. Is the choice of a qualitative method appropriate? What was this study exploring (eg behaviour/reasoning/beliefs)? Y Y
Do you think a quantitative approach could have equally/better addressed this issue? N N
4. Was the author’s position clearly stated? Has the researcher described his/her perspective? Y N
Has the researcher examined his/her role, potential bias and influence? Y N
5. Was the sampling strategy clearly described and justified? Check to see whether:
• the method of sampling is stated or described
• the investigators sampled the most useful or productive range of individuals and settings relevant to their question
• the characteristics of those included in the study are defined (and are comparable to the wider population)
Y Y
6. Was there an adequate description of the method of data
collection given?
• Is the method of data collection described and justified?
• How the data were collected (eg audiotape/videotape/field notes)?
• If interviews were used, were the questions pre-tested?
• If observation was used, is the context described and were observations made in a variety of circumstances?
Y N
  7. Were the procedures for data analysis / interpretation described and justified? Check to see whether:
• a description is given of how the themes and concepts were identified in the data
• the analysis was performed by more than one researcher
• negative/discrepant results were taken into account
• the data were fed back to the participants for comment
Y Y
C. What did they find? 8. What are the primary findings? Consider whether the results:
• address the research question
• are likely to be clinically important
Y Y
9. Are the results credible? Were sequences from the original data presented (eg quotations) and were these fairly selected?
• Is it possible to determine the source of the data presented (eg numbering of extracts)?
• How much of the information collected is available for independent assessment?
• Are the explanations for the results plausible and coherent?
• Are the results of the study compared with those from other studies?
N N
D. Are the results relevant locally? 10. Can the results be applied to the local situation? Consider differences between the local and study populations (eg cultural, geographical, ethical) which could affect the relevance of the study. Y Y
11. Were all important outcomes/results considered? Y Y
12. Accept for further use? Y Y