Interpretive description is a qualitative research methodology aligned with a constructivist and naturalistic orientation to inquiry. The aim of interpretive description, a relatively new qualitative methodology, is to generate knowledge relevant for the clinical context of applied health disciplines. To date there has been little discussion in the literature of the particular merits and limitations of this methodological framework. In this article I draw on my experience of using interpretive description as methodology for an inquiry into the moral experience of clinicians in humanitarian work. I identify and discuss strengths and challenges that can arise in the application of interpretive description. Strengths identified include a coherent logic and structure, an orientation toward the generation of practice-relevant findings, and attention to disciplinary biases and commitments. Challenges include limited resources for situating the methodology, challenges in employing a lesser-known methodology, and uncertainty regarding the degree of interpretation to seek.

CONTEXT Medical students increasingly wish to participate in international health electives (IHEs). The authors undertook to understand from the students' perspective the ethical challenges encountered on IHEs in lowresource settings and how students respond to these issues.METHODS Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 medical students upon their return from an IHE. A purposive sampling strategy was used. Inductive data analysis using a constant comparative technique generated initial codes which were later organised into higher-order themes.RESULTS Five themes relating to ethical issues were identified: (i) uncertainty about how best to help; (ii) perceptions of Western medical students as different; (iii) moving beyond one's scope of practice; (iv) navigating different cultures of medicine, and (v) unilateral capacity building.CONCLUSIONS International health electives are associated with a range of ethical issues for students. Students would benefit from formal pre-departure training, which should include an evaluation of their expectations of and motivations for participating in an IHE, careful selection of the IHE from amongst the opportunities available, learning about the local context of the IHE prior to departure, and the exploration and discussion of ethical and professionalism issues. Other factors that would benefit students include having an invested onsite colleague or supervisor, maintaining an ongoing connection with the home institution, and formal debriefing on conclusion of the IHE.ethical issues Medical Education 2011: 45: 704-711

BackgroundOver the past two decades, the promotion of collaborative partnerships involving researchers from low and middle income countries with those from high income countries has been a major development in global health research. Ideally, these partnerships would lead to more equitable collaboration including the sharing of research responsibilities and rewards. While collaborative partnership initiatives have shown promise and attracted growing interest, there has been little scholarly debate regarding the fair distribution of authorship credit within these partnerships.DiscussionIn this paper, we identify four key authorship issues relevant to global health research and discuss their ethical and practical implications. First, we argue that authorship guidance may not adequately apply to global health research because it requires authors to write or substantially revise the manuscript. Since most journals of international reputation in global health are written in English, this would systematically and unjustly exclude non-English speaking researchers even if they have substantially contributed to the research project. Second, current guidance on authorship order does not address or mitigate unfair practices which can occur in global health research due to power differences between researchers from high and low-middle income countries. It also provides insufficient recognition of “technical tasks” such as local participant recruitment. Third, we consider the potential for real or perceived editorial bias in medical science journals in favour of prominent western researchers, and the risk of promoting misplaced credit and/or prestige authorship. Finally, we explore how diverse cultural practices and expectations regarding authorship may create conflict between researchers from low-middle and high income countries and contribute to unethical authorship practices. To effectively deal with these issues, we suggest: 1) undertaking further empirical and conceptual research regarding authorship in global health research; 2) raising awareness on authorship issues in global health research; and 3) developing specific standards of practice that reflect relevant considerations of authorship in global health research.SummaryThrough review of the bioethics and global health literatures, and examination of guidance documents on ethical authorship, we identified a set of issues regarding authorship in collaborative partnerships between researchers from low-middle income countries and high income countries. We propose several recommendations to address these concerns.

Bouldering outdoors has an increased risk of injury to the fingers. Preventative measures appear largely ineffective in reducing the number of injuries in both cohorts.