Validation of a new assessment tool for qualitative research articles.

AIM This paper presents the development and validation of a new assessment tool for qualitative research articles, which could assess trustworthiness of qualitative research articles as defined by Guba and at the same time aid clinicians in their assessment. BACKGROUND There are more than 100 sets of proposals for quality criteria for qualitative research. However, we are not aware of an assessment tool that is validated and applicable, not only for researchers but also for clinicians with different levels of training and experience in reading research articles. METHOD In three phases from 2007 to 2009 we delevoped and tested such an assessment tool called VAKS, which is the Danish acronym for appraisal of qualitative studies. Phase 1 was to develop the tool based on a literature review and on consultation with qualitative researchers. Phase 2 was an inter-rater reliability test in which 40 health professionals participated. Phase 3 was an inter-rater reliability test among the five authors by means of five qualitative articles. RESULTS The new assessment tool was based on Guba's four criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of qualitative inquiries. The nurses found the assessment tool simple to use and helpful in assessing the quality of the articles. The inter-rater agreement was acceptable, but disagreement was seen for some items. CONCLUSION We have developed an assessment tool for appraisal of qualitative research studies. Nurses with a range of formal education and experience in reading research articles are able to appraise, relatively consistently, articles based on different qualitative research designs. We hope that VAKS will be used and further developed.

[1]  R. Ailinger Contributions of qualitative research to evidence-based practice in nursing. , 2003, Revista latino-americana de enfermagem.

[2]  R. Edwards,et al.  Interpreters/Translators and Cross-Language Research: Reflexivity and Border Crossings , 2002 .

[3]  W. Rheault,et al.  Appraising and Incorporating Qualitative Research in Evidence‐Based Practice , 2004 .

[4]  I. Hallberg,et al.  The meaning of having to live with cancer in old age. , 2004, European journal of cancer care.

[5]  M. Sandelowski,et al.  Reading Qualitative Studies , 2002 .

[6]  Tonette S. Rocco,et al.  Criteria for evaluating qualitative studies , 2010 .

[7]  J. Bensing,et al.  Older cancer patients' information and support needs surrounding treatment: An evaluation through the eyes of patients, relatives and professionals , 2009, BMC nursing.

[8]  A. Edberg,et al.  Living with persistent pain: experiences of older people receiving home care. , 2002, Journal of advanced nursing.

[9]  K. Malterud Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines , 2001, The Lancet.

[10]  B. Davies.,et al.  Everyday struggling to survive: experience of the urban poor living with advanced cancer. , 2007, Oncology nursing forum.

[11]  M. Dixon-Woods,et al.  The problem of appraising qualitative research. , 2004 .

[12]  H. Waterman,et al.  Praiseworthy pragmatism? Validity and action research. , 2003, Journal of advanced nursing.

[13]  J. Morse Reconceptualizing Qualitative Evidence , 2006, Qualitative health research.

[14]  Lucy Dillon,et al.  Quality in qualitative evaluation: A framework for assessing research evidence. A quality framework. , 2003 .

[15]  Jeanne Daly,et al.  A hierarchy of evidence for assessing qualitative health research. , 2007, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[16]  J. Dixon,et al.  Instrument translation process: a methods review. , 2004, Journal of advanced nursing.

[17]  C. Kauppi,et al.  Women with postpartum depression: "my husband" stories , 2009, BMC nursing.

[18]  Seanne Wilkins,et al.  Guidelines for critical review form - Qualitative studies (version 2.0), McMaster University Occupational Therapy Evidence-Based Practice Research Group , 2007 .

[19]  E. Guba Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries , 1981 .

[20]  E. Guba,et al.  Naturalistic inquiry: Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1985, 416 pp., $25.00 (Cloth) , 1985 .