Recruiting Palliative Patients for a Large Qualitative Study: Some Ethical Considerations and Staff Dilemmas

EXPLORE ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 159-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather Tan ◽  
Anne Wilson ◽  
Ian Olver ◽  
Christopher Barton
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Ethical Considerations ◽  
Palliative Patients

scholarly journals Humane treatment versus means of control: coercive measures in Norwegian high-security psychiatry, 1895–1978

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 424-442
Author(s):  
Magne Brekke Rabben ◽  
Øyvind Thomassen
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
Historical Study ◽  
Ethical Considerations ◽  
Patient Case ◽  
Coercive Measures ◽  
High Security ◽  
Technological Developments ◽  
Case Files ◽  
Insight Into

This article analyses the use of coercive measures in two national institutions for high-security psychiatry in Norway – Kriminalasylet (Criminal Asylum) and Reitgjerdet – during the period 1895–1978. Historical study of coercion in psychiatry is a fruitful approach to new insight into the moral and ethical considerations within the institutions. We approach the topic through a qualitative study of patient case files and ward reports from the institutions’ archives, as well as a comprehensive quantification of the coercive measures used. The data show shifting considerations of humane treatment and changes in the respect for human dignity in the institutions’ practices. They also show that technological developments, such as the introduction of new psychopharmaceuticals, did not necessarily lead to higher standards of treatment.

Qualitative Methods in Research

2022 ◽  
pp. 587-603
Author(s):  
Icarbord Tshabangu ◽  
Stefano Ba' ◽  
Silas Memory Madondo
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Qualitative Methods ◽  
Qualitative Methodology ◽  
Social Worlds ◽  
Ethical Considerations

This chapter discusses various methods and approaches to data collection under the qualitative methodology framework, noting that these methods provide rigour and depth understanding in an inquiry. Though the chapter touches on traditional qualitative methods such as the interview and observations, it focused more on examining alternative and non-traditional qualitative methods in data collection, such as the bricolage and distance researching. The chapter further identified other strategies such as sampling, triangulation and ethical considerations that may be relevant to a qualitative study. The chapter helps the reader to reach a broad-based understanding as to the location of qualitative research and the methodological demands necessary to apprehend complex social worlds of studied participants.

scholarly journals It’s More Complicated Than It Seems: Virtual Qualitative Research in the COVID-19 Era

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 160940692110029
Author(s):  
J. Kessa Roberts ◽  
Alexandra E. Pavlakis ◽  
Meredith P. Richards
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Careful Analysis ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Ethical Considerations ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Qualitative Data Collection ◽  
Made In

COVID-19 has necessitated innovation in many parts of our lives and qualitative research is no exception, as in-person qualitative data collection has been complicated by the constraints of social distancing and the prioritization of participants’ and researchers’ safety. Consequently, virtual methods have quickly gained traction. However, there is little research that comprehensively explores the range of practical, rigorous, and ethical considerations that arise when designing and engaging in virtual qualitative research. Addressing this gap, we examine the process of designing and conducting a virtual qualitative study, using specific examples from our case study of student homelessness in Houston, Texas that drew from semi-structured interviews and the analysis of over 50 documents. Garnering insights from Salmons’ Qualitative e-Research Framework (2016), and benefiting from 22 technical memos that documented our process, we profile the challenges we faced—and choices we made in response—as we designed and conducted our study. Our findings suggest that in practice, engaging in virtual qualitative research, particularly in the era of COVID-19, is a purposive exercise that requires thoughtful, careful analysis around a number of methodological challenges as well as ethical and equity-oriented questions. Our exploratory work has timely implications for qualitative scholars in the current COVID-19 context, but also showcases the potential to conduct high-quality, rigorous, ethical qualitative research in a virtual format, offering a glimmer of hope for more equitable qualitative research in contexts of crisis and beyond.

The Ethical Algorithm: Journalist/Whistleblower Relationships Explored Through the Lens of Social Exchange

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 172-245
Author(s):  
Stephenson Waters
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Conceptual Model ◽  
Social Exchange ◽  
Professional Standards ◽  
Ethical Considerations ◽  
Ethics Codes ◽  
Trust Relationship ◽  
Professional Judgments

This study examined the ethical and professional judgments journalists consider when deciding to trust a whistleblower and determined how whistleblowers influence ethical and newsgathering processes. With a qualitative study, this research uncovered common ethical and procedural considerations journalists, who are influenced by gatekeeping forces, make when presented with information from a whistleblower, with the goal to create a conceptual model—an “ethical algorithm”—that journalists employ when deciding to publish whistleblower disclosures. In addition, the decision to build a trust relationship with a whistleblower is examined from the frameworks of ethical considerations, professional standards, and ethics codes. Finally, the journalist–whistleblower relationship is considered as a form of social exchange, a negotiated relationship in which parties determine trust as a result of an exchange of mutually beneficial acts.

Satisfaction with and Perception of Pain Management among Palliative Patients with Breakthrough Pain: A Qualitative Study

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 552-560 ◽  
Author(s):  
Subramanian Pathmawathi ◽  
Tan Seng Beng ◽  
Lee Mei Li ◽  
Roshaslina Rosli ◽  
Supermanian Sharwend ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Breakthrough Pain ◽  
Palliative Patients

scholarly journals Perspectives and ethical considerations for return of genetics and genomics research results: a qualitative study of genomics researchers in Uganda

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Ochieng ◽  
Betty Kwagala ◽  
John Barugahare ◽  
Erisa Mwaka ◽  
Deborah Ekusai-Sebatta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Genomic Research ◽  
Return Of Results ◽  
Ethical Guidelines ◽  
Ethical Considerations ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Regulatory Frameworks ◽  
Genomics Research ◽  
Genetics And Genomics ◽  
Clinically Significant

Abstract Background The return of genetics and genomics research results has been a subject of ongoing global debate. Such feedback is ethically desirable to update participants on research findings particularly those deemed clinically significant. Although there is limited literature, debate continues in African on what constitutes appropriate practice regarding the return of results for genetics and genomics research. This study explored perspectives and ethical considerations of Ugandan genomics researchers regarding the return of genetics and genomics research results. Methods This was a qualitative study that employed in-depth interviews. Thirty participants were purposively selected based on their expertise as genomics researchers in Uganda. Data were analysed through content analysis along the main themes of the study using a comprehensive thematic matrix, to identify common patterns arising from the narratives. NVivo software 12 was used to support data analysis. Results The return of genetics and genomics research results was generally acceptable to researchers, and some indicated that they had previously returned individual or aggregate results to participants and communities. The main reasons cited for sharing research results with participants included their clinical utility, actionability and overall benefit to society. Ethical considerations for appropriate return of results included a need for effective community engagement, genetic counselling prior to disclosure of the results, adequate informed consent, and proper assessment of the implications of, or consequences of returning of results. However, the approaches to return of results were perceived as unstandardized due to the lack of appropriate regulatory frameworks. Conclusions The return of genetic and genomic research results is generally acceptable to researchers despite the lack of appropriate regulatory frameworks. Ethical considerations for return of genetics and genomics research results are highly divergent, hence the need for national ethical guidelines to appropriately regulate the practice.

scholarly journals Exploring the recruitment, ethical considerations, conduct and information dissemination of an audiology trial: a pretrial qualitative study (q-COACH)

Trials ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilie Francis-Auton ◽  
Chris Warren ◽  
Jeffrey Braithwaite ◽  
Frances Rapport
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Information Dissemination ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Clinical Practices ◽  
Ethical Considerations ◽  
Trial Conduct ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Introduction Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), while still considered the gold standard approach in medical research, can encounter impediments to their successful conduct and the dissemination of results. Pretrial qualitative research can usefully address some of these impediments, including recruitment and retention, ethical conduct, and preferred methods of dissemination. However, pretrial qualitative work is rarely undertaken in audiology. The Comparison of outcomes with hearing aids and cochlear implants in adults with moderately severe-to-profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss (COACH) is a proposed RCT aiming to clarify when hearing aids (HAs) or cochlear implants (CIs) are the most suitable for different degrees of hearing loss and for which kinds of patients. q-COACH is a pretrial, qualitative study examining stakeholders’ experiences of HAs and CIs, current clinical practices and stakeholders’ perspectives of the design, conduct and dissemination plans for the proposed COACH study. Methods Twenty-four participants including general practitioners, audiologists, adult HA users, and adult support networks undertook either semi-structured individual or paired interviews and completed demographic questionnaires. Data were analysed thematically. Results Four key themes arose from this study: 1) rethinking sampling and recruitment strategies, 2) ethical considerations, 3) refining trial conduct, and 4) interconnected, appropriate and accessible methods of results dissemination. Conclusions This qualitative investigation identified key considerations for the proposed RCT design, conduct and dissemination to help with successful implementation of COACH, and to indicate a plan of action at all RCT stages that would be acceptable to potential participants. By drawing on the perspectives of multiple key stakeholders and including a more general discussion of their experience and opinions of hearing loss, hearing device use and service availability, the study revealed experiential and ethical paradigms in which stakeholders operate. In so doing, q-COACH has exposed the benefits of preliminary qualitative investigations that enable detailed and rich understandings of the phenomenon at stake, forestalling problems and improving the quality of trial design, conduct and dissemination, while informing future RCT development discussions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document