Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services

User menu

  • My Cart
  • Log In
  • Log Out

Search

  • Advanced search
The Journal of Rheumatology
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services
  • My Cart
  • Log In
  • Log Out
The Journal of Rheumatology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • Follow jrheum on Twitter
  • Visit jrheum on Facebook
  • Follow jrheum on LinkedIn
  • Follow jrheum on YouTube
  • Follow jrheum on Instagram
  • Follow jrheum on RSS
EditorialEditorial

Qualitative Methods in Systemic Sclerosis Research

SINDHU R. JOHNSON and KELLY K. O’BRIEN
The Journal of Rheumatology July 2016, 43 (7) 1265-1267; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.160602
SINDHU R. JOHNSON
Toronto Scleroderma Program, Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, Toronto Western Hospital; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: Sindhu.Johnson@uhn.on.ca
KELLY K. O’BRIEN
Department of Physical Therapy, Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • eLetters
PreviousNext
Loading

Qualitative research methods are important tools that are frequently underused in medical research, particularly in systemic sclerosis (scleroderma, SSc) research. In this issue of The Journal, Nakayama, et al report a thematic synthesis of qualitative studies of patients’ perspectives and experiences living with SSc1. This editorial serves as a brief introduction to qualitative research, addressing the questions: What is it? How is it used? How is it different from quantitative research? What are key indicators of its rigor?

Quantitative vs Qualitative Research Methods

Quantitative research is a form of study design that uses statistical methods or other means of quantification to address a research question. It involves deductive approaches and hypothesis testing to approximate the truth and handling of uncertainty2. Quantitative methods generally evaluate participants in settings removed from the natural environment (e.g., randomized controlled trials) and attempts are made to control for confounding factors. In contrast, qualitative research is a form of study design that uses systematic and reproducible methods to explore experiences, behaviors, and beliefs about a concept or phenomenon. Qualitative research commonly involves interpretative forms of analysis in which the unit of study is often a participant’s experienced reality3. Results are a representation of reality rather than an approximation of the truth (see Table 1).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Comparison of quantitative and qualitative methods.

Qualitative methods may be preferable if one wishes to develop a new theory, explore an unknown phenomenon, evaluate the meaning of a concept, or understand a phenomenon. Qualitative research can provide more detailed descriptions and nuanced understanding of a concept, in contrast to a “cause and effect” relationship. A qualitative approach may facilitate a more in-depth understanding of quantitative results, answering “what do these numbers really mean?” For example, unhealthy lifestyle behavior, such as smoking, can be a significant risk factor for disease. However, it is important to understand that the experience of an individual’s smoking status is embedded within his/her cultural and social context4. Therefore, giving a numeric estimate of the magnitude of association between the unhealthy behavior (e.g., smoking) and the health state can result in an incomplete understanding of the relationship and opportunities for health improvement (e.g., smoking cessation programs). Where quantitative research can address the “how much?” question, qualitative research can address the “why?” and “how?” questions. While quantitative research results are usually represented in the form of numbers, qualitative research results are often represented in the form of quotations of participants describing the experience behind a particular concept of interest. Or investigators might use mixed methods, combining quantitative and qualitative research techniques, into a single study.

Common examples of qualitative data collection methods may include one-on-one interviews, focus groups, video analysis, or participant observation. Interview questions tend to be semistructured in nature, allowing the interviewer to use probing questions to explore in more depth a concept of interest (e.g., Can you tell me more about that?). An interview or focus group discussion guide is commonly the data collection tool that can provide structure to the sequence of the interview while allowing for flexibility. Interviews are usually audio recorded, and later transcribed verbatim. Analysis of qualitative data can include theoretical or descriptive approaches. Descriptive qualitative analysis often involves line-by-line coding of text. Codes are clustered into broader categories that can then comprise an overall theme that collectively describes the concept of interest. Results of qualitative research are often represented in the form of themes, supported by direct quotations from participants to illustrate a concept5. Multimethod studies may combine qualitative data collection strategies such as the combination of focus groups and interviews.

Examples of Qualitative Research in SSc

The scleroderma research community is using qualitative methods to develop classification criteria for SSc subsets. In an era of antibody profiling, genetics, and molecular classification, the meaning and purpose of classification criteria for SSc subsets is uncertain. Using one-on-one, face-to-face interviews of international SSc experts and a content-analytic approach, investigators found that the concept of SSc subsets is a multidimensional and complex construct6. Experts believe that subsets exist and have an effect on the aggressiveness of investigations, and on therapeutic decision making, prognosis, and survival. This information is being used to inform the study design of subsequent quantitative phases of SSc subset classification criteria development.

In the present report by Nakayama, et al1 the authors describe a document analysis of qualitative studies among individuals with SSc. The authors performed a systematic review of the literature and conducted a thematic synthesis of 26 articles that used qualitative methods to describe the perspectives and experiences of adults with SSc. Qualitative methods of data collection reported in the literature included face-to-face interviews, focus groups, and an open-ended questionnaire. The authors identified 6 themes that captured the experiences of adults with SSc across the included studies: distressing appearance transformation, palpable physical limitations, social impairment, navigating uncertainty, feeling alone and misunderstood, and gradual acceptance and relative optimism. Under the domain of distressing appearance transformation, the authors reported that “patients felt they looked terrifying, unattractive and undesirable, using terms such as ‘freak,’ ‘dracula,’ and ‘monster’ to describe themselves.” Under the thematic domain of gradual acceptance and relative optimism, the authors report: “One patient was touched by her husband who said ‘after 30 years of marriage we are the same people inside we just have different wrappers.’”

The participant quotations represent the lived experience, and offer a call to action to take a “multidisciplinary approach to patient-centered care that encompasses strategies to promote self-esteem, self-efficacy and open communication2.”

The insights gained from thematic synthesis, such as those reported by Nakayama, et al, are critically important if the global SSc community is to develop a patient-centered research agenda. As an example, SPIN (Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network), an international collaboration of patient groups and SSc researchers, has been established to test accessible, low-cost, online interventions to improve quality of life and reduce disability7.

Principles of Qualitative Study Design

The principles of study design such as the sampling frame, sample size, and method of data analysis remain true in qualitative studies.

Sampling frame

Random sampling is frequently encouraged in quantitative research to reduce the risk of potential bias, and to allow for extrapolation of findings to the larger population. Because the goal of qualitative research is to understand an underlying concept, a sample should be chosen to represent a range of perspectives4. Preferred sampling strategies include purposive sampling (individuals are chosen based on the needs for the study), convenience sampling (sample chosen based on ease of access), or snowball sampling (respondents nominate other candidates).

Sample size

There are no firm guidelines on an appropriate sample size for a qualitative study. Rather, emphasis is put on saturation, which involves recruitment of sufficient individuals to achieve adequate representation of the concepts, until no new information is gained. However, a sample size justification is necessary, and should include consideration of feasibility, the target population, and typical numbers of participants required to achieve saturation in similar studies8.

Analysis

Qualitative content analysis often involves classifying large amounts of text into categories that represent similar meanings9. Transcripts of interviews or focus groups are reviewed line by line to identify themes that represent an idea. Codes are assigned to the ideas. Codes are clustered into broader categories or themes. This process is conducted iteratively, while identifying new themes and considering conflicting ideas10.

Assessing the Rigor of a Qualitative Study

Attributes of rigor in qualitative research include trustworthiness, dependability, and transferability (analogous to validity, reliability, and generalizability in a quantitative study). A number of approaches may be undertaken to ensure the trustworthiness of the results. Theoretical saturation can be achieved by continuing to collect data until no new relevant data or themes emerge. Approaches to ensuring analytical rigor may include verifying the accuracy of transcription, coding carried out by 2 or more investigators, and reviewing preliminary results with the participants.

Qualitative research is a broad methodological approach that can be used by investigators to better understand a concept or phenomenon. Application of these methods requires the same considerations and benchmarks for methodologic rigor as quantitative methods. Qualitative methods should be considered part of an investigator’s toolkit to improve our understanding of rheumatic diseases, including SSc.

Acknowledgment

Dr. Johnson is supported by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Clinician Scientist Award, and the Oscar and Eleanor Markovitz fund for Scleroderma Research through the Arthritis Research Foundation. Dr. O’Brien is supported by a New Investigator Award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Nakayama A,
    2. Tunnicliffe DJ,
    3. Thakkar V,
    4. Singh-Grewal D,
    5. O’Neill S,
    6. Craig JC,
    7. et al.
    Patients’ perspectives and experiences living with systemic sclerosis: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies. J Rheumatol 2016;43:1363–75.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Johnson SR,
    2. Tomlinson GA,
    3. Hawker GA,
    4. Granton JT,
    5. Feldman BM
    . Methods to elicit beliefs for Bayesian priors: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:355–69.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Strauss A,
    2. Corbin J
    . Open coding. Basics of qualitative research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications Inc.; 1998.
  4. 4.↵
    1. Rowan M,
    2. Huston P
    . Qualitative research articles: information for authors and peer reviewers. CMAJ 1997;157:1442–6.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Sandelowski M
    . Focus on qualitative methods. The use of quotes in qualitative research. Res Nurs Health 1994;17:479–82.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Johnson SR,
    2. Soowamber M,
    3. Fransen J,
    4. Khanna D,
    5. van den Hoogen F,
    6. Baron M,
    7. et al.
    There is a need for new systemic sclerosis subset classification criteria: a content analytic approach. Arthritis Rheum 2015;67:2257–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  7. 7.↵
    1. Riehm KE,
    2. Kwakkenbos L,
    3. Carrier ME,
    4. Bartlett SJ,
    5. Malcarne VL,
    6. Mouthon L,
    7. et al.
    Validation of the Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease (SEMCD) Scale: A Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network (SPIN) Cohort Study. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2015 Nov 30 (E-pub ahead of print).
  8. 8.↵
    1. Sandelowski M
    . Sample size in qualitative research. Res Nurs Health 1995;18:179–83.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Hsieh HF,
    2. Shannon SE
    . Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 2005;15:1277–88.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. Dierckx de Casterle B,
    2. Gastmans C,
    3. Bryon E,
    4. Denier Y
    . QUAGOL: a guide for qualitative data analysis. Int J Nurs Stud 2012;49:360–71.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Rheumatology
Vol. 43, Issue 7
1 Jul 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by Author
  • Editorial Board (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about The Journal of Rheumatology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Qualitative Methods in Systemic Sclerosis Research
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from The Journal of Rheumatology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the The Journal of Rheumatology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Qualitative Methods in Systemic Sclerosis Research
SINDHU R. JOHNSON, KELLY K. O’BRIEN
The Journal of Rheumatology Jul 2016, 43 (7) 1265-1267; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.160602

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

 Request Permissions

Share
Qualitative Methods in Systemic Sclerosis Research
SINDHU R. JOHNSON, KELLY K. O’BRIEN
The Journal of Rheumatology Jul 2016, 43 (7) 1265-1267; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.160602
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Quantitative vs Qualitative Research Methods
    • Examples of Qualitative Research in SSc
    • Principles of Qualitative Study Design
    • Assessing the Rigor of a Qualitative Study
    • Acknowledgment
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • eLetters

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Spondyloarthritis Among Patients With Uveitis: Can We Improve Referral Pathways?
  • Beyond Empowerment in Rheumatology Care
  • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Increases the Risk of Gestational Diabetes: Truth or Illusion?
Show more Editorial

Similar Articles

Content

  • First Release
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Collections
  • Audiovisual Rheum
  • COVID-19 and Rheumatology

Resources

  • Guide for Authors
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Author Payment
  • Reviewers
  • Advertisers
  • Classified Ads
  • Reprints and Translations
  • Permissions
  • Meetings
  • FAQ
  • Policies

Subscribers

  • Subscription Information
  • Purchase Subscription
  • Your Account
  • Terms and Conditions

More

  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • My Alerts
  • My Folders
  • Privacy/GDPR Policy
  • RSS Feeds
The Journal of Rheumatology
The content of this site is intended for health care professionals.
Copyright © 2022 by The Journal of Rheumatology Publishing Co. Ltd.
Print ISSN: 0315-162X; Online ISSN: 1499-2752
Powered by HighWire