The rocky road: qualitative research as evidence

Health research grows ever more holistic in its understanding of health and illness, more comprehensive in empirical questions, and more interdisciplinary in approaches. As we investigate social and personal aspects of health, we become drawn to social science knowledge in addition to biomedical and epidemiological perspectives. With this multidisciplinary basis for clinical knowledge comes “qualitative” research, an empirical method seemingly at odds with traditional rules of evidence and with the hierarchy of research designs propounded by evidence-based medicine.1, 2 The philosophy of evidence-based medicine suggests that as ways of knowing, induction is inferior to deduction, subjective perceptions are inferior to objective quantification, and description is inferior to inferential testing. Qualitative tenets invert these imperatives: investigators aim for inductive description using subjective interpretation. New readers of qualitative reports thus confront 3 issues. Firstly, does qualitative inquiry belong at the bottom of evidence-based medicine's traditional research design hierarchy? Secondly, if familiar rules of evidence do not apply, what features distinguish a noteworthy study? Thirdly, what is the clinical usefulness of qualitative research information compared with that of quantitative information? “Qualitative” health research is best characterised not by its qualitative data but by several assumptions about what social reality is like (ontology) and how we can best learn the truth about this reality (epistemology). These premises differ from those required to conduct, analyse, and believe in the results of quantitative research, such as a randomised controlled trial. Quantitative clinical research typically addresses biomedical questions. It tests hypothesised causal relations between quantified variables. (These include, of course, statistically “qualitative” variables, which are those that can be categorised and counted.) Quantitative research questions require key ingredients. Firstly, they require variables that describe natural phenomena coupled with a belief that these variables exist and can be measured objectively. Secondly, they require a belief that …

[1]  M. Patton,et al.  Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis. , 1999, Health services research.

[2]  C Forchuk,et al.  How to critique qualitative research articles. , 1993, The Canadian journal of nursing research = Revue canadienne de recherche en sciences infirmieres.

[3]  K C Stange,et al.  Integrating qualitative and quantitative research methods. , 1989, Family medicine.

[4]  D. Cook,et al.  Users' guides to the medical literature: XXIII. Qualitative research in health care A. Are the results of the study valid? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. , 2000, JAMA.

[5]  T. Greenhalgh How to read a paper: Assessing the methodological quality of published papers , 1997, BMJ.

[6]  Gordon H. Guyatt,et al.  Guides to the Medical Literature XXV . Evidence-Based Medicine : Principles for Applying the Users ’ Guides to Patient Care , 2000 .

[7]  W L Miller,et al.  Reading and evaluating qualitative research studies. , 1995, The Journal of family practice.

[8]  R. Frankel,et al.  Evaluating the quality of qualitative research , 1991, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[9]  David L. Altheide,et al.  Criteria for assessing interpretive validity in qualitative research. , 1994 .

[10]  Janice M. Morse,et al.  Is Qualitative Research Complete? , 1996 .

[11]  D. Sackett,et al.  The Ends of Human Life: Medical Ethics in a Liberal Polity , 1992, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[12]  D. Cook,et al.  A User's Guide to Qualitative Research in Health Care , 2000 .

[13]  N. Denzin,et al.  Handbook of Qualitative Research , 1994 .

[14]  A. Strauss,et al.  Grounded theory , 2017 .

[15]  D L Streiner,et al.  Reconcilable Differences: The Marriage of Qualitative and Quantitative Methods , 1996, Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie.

[16]  K. Devers How will we know "good" qualitative research when we see it? Beginning the dialogue in health services research. , 1999, Health services research.

[17]  D. Cook,et al.  Users' guides to the medical literature: XXIII. Qualitative research in health care B. What are the results and how do they help me care for my patients? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. , 2000, JAMA.

[18]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation and research methods , 1992 .

[19]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Users' guides to the medical literature. , 1993, JAMA.

[20]  John K. Smith,et al.  Closing Down the Conversation: The End of the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate Among Educational Inquirers , 1986 .

[21]  J. Hughes,et al.  The philosophy of social research , 1981 .

[22]  J. Smith Quantitative Versus Qualitative Research: An Attempt to Clarify the Issue , 1983 .

[23]  C. Furberg,et al.  Does antihypertensive treatment of the elderly prevent cardiovascular events or prolong life? A meta-analysis of hypertension treatment trials. , 1995, Archives of family medicine.

[24]  D L Morgan,et al.  Practical Strategies for Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Applications to Health Research , 1998, Qualitative health research.