How Cardiac Arrest Survivors Cope With Life Particularly Survivors From In-hospital

Qualitative Outline Questions Box 10.1 Guidelines for Critically Appraising Qualitative Designs 1. Was the research tradition for the qualitative study identified? If none was identified, can one be inferred? 2. Is the research question congruent with a specific research tradition? Are the data sources and research methods congruent with the research tradition? 3. How well was the research design described? Are design decisions explained and justified? Does it appear that the design emerged during data collection, allowing researchers to capitalize on early information? 4. Did the design lend itself to a thorough, in-depth examination of the focal phe-nomenon? Was there evidence of reflexivity? What design elements might have strengthened the study (e.g., a longitudinal perspective rather than a cross-sectional one)? 5. Was the study undertaken with an ideological perspective? If so, is there evidence that ideological goals were achieved (e.g., Was there full collaboration between re-searchers and participants? Did the research have the power to be transformativern Box 11.1 Guidelines for Critically Appraising Qualitative Sampling Plans 1. Was the setting appropriate for addressing the research question, and was it adequately described? 2. What type of sampling strategy was used? 3. Were the eligibility criteria for the study specified? How were participants recruited into the study? 4. Given the information needs of the study—and, if applicable, its qualitative tradition—was the sampling approach effective? S. Was the sample size adequate and appropriate? Did the researcher indicate that saturation had been achieved? Do the findings suggest a richly textured and comprehensive set of data without any apparent 'holes' or thin areas? 6. Were key characteristics of the sample described (e.g., age, gender)? Was a rich description of participants and context provided, allowing for an assessment of the transferability of the findings? Box 11.2 Guidelines for Critically Appraising Data Collecdon Methods In Qualitative Studies 1. Given the research question and the characteristics of study part Kapants, did the researcher use the best method of capturing study phenomena (i.e.. sellrepons. observation)? Should supplementary methods have boon used to enrich the data available for analysts? 2. If self-report methods were used, did the researcher make good decisions about the specific method used to solicit information (e.g.. unstructured interviews, torus group interviews, and so 3. If a topic guide was used, did the report present examples of specific questions? Did the wording of questions encourage net responses? 4. Were interviews recorded and transcribed? If interviews were not recorded, what steps were taken to ensure data accuracy? 5. II observational methods were used, did the report adequately describe what the observations entailed? What did the researcher actually observe, In what types of setting did the observations occur, and how often and over how long a period were observations made? 6. What role did the researcher assume in terms Of being an observer and a panics, panty Was this role appropriate? 7. How were observational data recorded? Did the recording method maximize data quality?