Objective: To outline the importance of the clarity of data analysis in the doing and reporting of interview-based qualitative research. Approach:We explore the clear links between data analysis and evidence.We argue that transparency in the data analysis process is integral to determining the evidence that is generated. Data analysis must occur concurrently with data collection and comprises an ongoing process of 'testing the fit' between the data collected and analysis. We discuss four steps in the process of thematic data analysis: immersion, coding, categorising and generation of themes. Conclusion: Rigorous and systematicanalysis of qualitative data is integral to the production of high-quality research.Studies that give an explicit account of the data analysis process provide insights into how conclusions are reached while studies that explain themes anchored to data and theory produce the strongest evidence.

No abstract

A patient-centred approach involves transferring power and authority away from health care professionals and towards patients. We encourage nurses to take a leadership role by changing the way in which health care is delivered towards a focus on patients'lives. Learning about patients' lives may assist nurses to offer health information to patients that is more relevant and, therefore, useful.

This paper examines the UK press coverage of genetically modified crops within the EU and explores how the theme of nationalism is utilized within the genetic modification (GM) debate. The way in which the EU is represented shifts, depending on whether it is being described in relation to the UK or the rest of the world (usually the USA). The EU is placed either as a threat to the UK, forcing genetically modified organisms into the country, or as a barrier, protecting UK citizens from the corrupt forces of the USA. This paper focuses on how countries and continents are constructed as being free of genetically modified organisms and how notions of nationalism and purity are used to achieve this. It argues that the way in which genetic modification is discussed often leads to an inherent but unintended xenophobic discourse. It is not just the mixing of genes that we are told to fear; the mixing of peoples is also alluded to. This paper explores the ways in which risks can be merged, as genetic modification specifically becomes linked to the asylum debate. Finally, the paper will discuss the dangers of contaminating the genetic modification debate with xenophobic arguments. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

No abstract