BackgroundThe main objective of this methodological manuscript was to illustrate the role of using qualitative research in emergency settings. We outline rigorous criteria applied to a qualitative study assessing perceptions and experiences of staff working in Australian emergency departments.MethodsWe used an integrated mixed-methodology framework to identify different perspectives and experiences of emergency department staff during the implementation of a time target government policy. The qualitative study comprised interviews from 119 participants across 16 hospitals. The interviews were conducted in 2015–2016 and the data were managed using NVivo version 11. We conducted the analysis in three stages, namely: conceptual framework, comparison and contrast and hypothesis development. We concluded with the implementation of the four-dimension criteria (credibility, dependability, confirmability and transferability) to assess the robustness of the study,ResultsWe adapted four-dimension criteria to assess the rigour of a large-scale qualitative research in the emergency department context. The criteria comprised strategies such as building the research team; preparing data collection guidelines; defining and obtaining adequate participation; reaching data saturation and ensuring high levels of consistency and inter-coder agreement.ConclusionBased on the findings, the proposed framework satisfied the four-dimension criteria and generated potential qualitative research applications to emergency medicine research. We have added a methodological contribution to the ongoing debate about rigour in qualitative research which we hope will guide future studies in this topic in emergency care research. It also provided recommendations for conducting future mixed-methods studies. Future papers on this series will use the results from qualitative data and the empirical findings from longitudinal data linkage to further identify factors associated with ED performance; they will be reported separately.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-2915-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
VARMA models are a reliable forecasting method to predict ED demand for strategic planning and resource allocation. While the ARMA models are a closely competing alternative, they under-estimated future ED demand.
Background:To report the number of malignant pleural and peritoneal mesotheliomas that have occurred in former Wittenoom crocidolite workers to the end of 2008, to compare this with earlier predictions, and to relate the mesothelioma rate to amount of exposure.Methods:A group of 6489 men and 419 women who had worked for the company operating the former Wittenoom crocidolite mine and mill at some time between 1943 and 1966 have been followed up throughout Australia and Italy to the end of 2008.Results:The cumulative number of mesotheliomas up to 2008 was 316 in men (268 pleural, 48 peritoneal) and 13 (all pleural) in women. There had been 302 deaths with mesothelioma in men and 13 in women, which was almost 10% of all known deaths. Mesothelioma rate, both pleural and peritoneal, increased with time since first exposure and appeared to reach a plateau after about 40 to 50 years. The mesothelioma rate increased with amount of exposure and the peritoneal mesotheliomas occurred preferentially in the highest exposure group, 37% compared with 15% overall.Conclusion:By the end of 2008, the number of mesothelioma deaths had reached 4.7% for all the male workers and 3.1% for the females. Over the past 8 years the numbers were higher than expected. It is predicted that about another 60 to 70 deaths with mesothelioma may occur in men by 2020.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.