Sharing qualitative research findings with participants: Study experiences of methodological and ethical dilemmas

被引:109
作者
Goldblatt, Hadass [1 ]
Karnieli-Miller, Orit [2 ]
Neumann, Melanie [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Haifa, Dept Nursing, IL-31905 Haifa, Israel
[2] Univ Haifa, Dept Community Mental Hlth, IL-31905 Haifa, Israel
[3] Private Univ Witten Herdecke, Fac Hlth, Dept Med, Integrated Curriculum Anthroposoph Med ICURAM, Witten, Germany
关键词
Member-check; Credibility; Qualitative research; Ethical dilemmas; Trustworthiness; HEALTH-CARE; REFLECTIONS; PHYSICIANS; VALIDITY; BARRIERS;
D O I
10.1016/j.pec.2010.12.016
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Objective: Sharing qualitative research findings with participants. namely member-check, is perceived as a procedure designed to enhance study credibility and participant involvement. It is rarely used. however. and its methodological usefulness and ethical problems have been questioned. This article explores benefits and risks in applying member-check when studying healthcare topics, questioning the way it should be performed. Methods: We discuss researchers' experiences in applying member-check, using four examples from three different studies: healthcare-providers' experiences of working with sexual-abuse survivors: adolescents' exposure to domestic-violence, and delivering and receiving bad news. Results: Methodological and ethical difficulties can arise when performing member-check, challenging the day-to-day researcher-participant experience, and potentially, the physician-patient relationship. Conclusion: Applying member-check in healthcare settings is complex. Although this strategy has good intentions, it is not necessarily the best method for achieving credibility. Harm can be caused to participants. researchers and the doctor-patient relationship, risking researchers' commitment to ethical principles. Practice implications: Because participants' experience regarding member-check is difficult to predict, such a procedure should be undertaken cautiously. Prior to initiating member-check, researchers should ask themselves whether such a procedure is potentially risky for participants: and if anonymity cannot be guaranteed, use alternative procedures when needed. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:389 / 395
页数:7
相关论文
共 54 条
  • [1] Primary care for elderly people: Why do doctors find it so hard?
    Adams, WL
    McIlvain, HE
    Lacy, NL
    Magsi, H
    Crabtree, BF
    Yenny, SK
    Sitorius, MA
    [J]. GERONTOLOGIST, 2002, 42 (06) : 835 - 842
  • [2] [Anonymous], INT J QUAL METHODS
  • [3] [Anonymous], THESIS U HAIFA HAIFA
  • [4] Hope, Truth, and Preparing for Death: Perspectives of Surrogate Decision Makers
    Apatira, Latifat
    Boyd, Elizabeth A.
    Malvar, Grace
    Evans, Leah R.
    Luce, John M.
    Lo, Bernard
    White, Douglas B.
    [J]. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2008, 149 (12) : 861 - +
  • [5] The information needs of patients treated with primary angioplasty for heart attack: An exploratory study
    Astin, Felicity
    Cioss, S. Jose
    McLenachan, Jim
    Hunter, Stacey
    Priestley, Claire
    [J]. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2008, 73 (02) : 325 - 332
  • [6] Bingham June, 2003, Ann Intern Med, V138, P73
  • [7] Contracts and member checks in qualitative research in human geography: reason for caution?
    Bradshaw, M
    [J]. AREA, 2001, 33 (02) : 202 - 211
  • [8] Beyond Checking Experiences of the Validation Interview
    Buchbinder, Eli
    [J]. QUALITATIVE SOCIAL WORK, 2011, 10 (01) : 106 - 122
  • [9] Calam B, 2000, CAN MED ASSOC J, V163, P1255
  • [10] Implementation of diversity in healthcare practices: Barriers and opportunities
    Celik, Halime
    Abma, Tineke A.
    Widdershoven, Guy A.
    van Wijmen, Frans C. B.
    Klinge, Ineke
    [J]. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2008, 71 (01) : 65 - 71