Objective. Grounded theory (GT) is an established qualitative research method, but few papers have encapsulated the benefits, limits, and basic tenets of doing GTresearch on user and provider experiences of health care services. GT can be used to guide the entire study method, or it can be applied at the data analysis stage only. Methods. We summarize key components of GT and common GT procedures used by qualitative researchers in health care research. We draw on our experience of conducting a GTstudy on amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients' experiences of health care services. Findings. We discuss why some approaches in GTresearch may work better than others, particularly when the focus of study is hard-to-reach population groups. We highlight the flexibility of procedures in GT to build theory about how people engage with health care services. Conclusion. GT enables researchers to capture and understand health care experiences. GT methods are particularly valuable when the topic of interest has not previously been studied. GT can be applied to bring structure and rigor to the analysis of qualitative data. Key Words. Grounded theory, qualitative research, qualitative interviews, health care experiences Many researchers and research teams that are predominantly quantitative in orientation may find that qualitative methods are needed to answer some or all of the questions they seek to answer in their study. This article seeks to enable such researchers to conduct qualitative research and data analysis with the help of the grounded theory (GT) method, one of the most widely used and established qualitative methods. We give practical advice pertaining to each step of a research project, and we illustrate these with the help of examples from a recent study that we conducted, and also hypothetical examples of research scenarios (the latter are in italics).

No abstract

The grounded theory (GT) method is widely applied, yet frequently misunderstood. We outline the main variants of GT and dispel the most common myths associated with GT. We argue that the different variants of GT incorporate a core set of shared procedures that can be put to work by any researcher or team from their chosen ontological and epistemological perspective. This “shared core” of the GT method is articulated as the principles of (1) taking the word “grounded” seriously, (2) capturing and explaining context-related social processes, (3) pursuing theory through engagement with data, and (4) pursuing theory through theoretical sampling. In this article, we have put forward, in a nutshell, a distillation of core principles underpinning existing GT approaches that can aid further engagement with the different variants of GT. We are motivated by the wish to make GT more comprehensible and accessible, especially for researchers who are new to the method.

Theoretical sampling is a key procedure for theory building in the grounded theory method. Confusion about how to employ theoretical sampling in grounded theory can exist among researchers who use or who want to use the grounded theory method. We illustrate how we employed theoretical sampling in diverse grounded theory studies and answer key questions about theoretical sampling in grounded theory. We show how theoretical sampling functions in grounded theory and how it differs from sampling for data generation alone. We demonstrate how induction, retroduction, and abduction operate in grounded theory and how memoing drives theoretical sampling in the pursuit of theory. We explicate how theoretical sampling can contextualize data to build concepts and theory. Finally, we show how theoretical sampling in grounded theory operates in secondary analysis to derive theory that goes beyond the original purpose of data collection.

Loneliness and depression are serious mental health concerns across the spectrum of residential care, from nursing homes to assisted and retirement living. Psychosocial care provided to residents to address these concerns is typically based on a long-standing tradition of 'light' social events, such as games, trips, and social gatherings, planned and implemented by staff. Although these activities provide enjoyment for some, loneliness and depression persist and the lack of resident input perpetuates the stereotype of residents as passive recipients of care. Residents continue to report lack of meaning in their lives, limited opportunities for contribution and frustration with paternalistic communication with staff. Those living with dementia face additional discrimination resulting in a range of unmet needs including lack of autonomy and belonging-both of which are linked with interpersonal violence. Research suggests, however, that programs fostering engagement and peer support provide opportunities for residents to be socially productive and to develop a valued social identity. The purpose of this paper is to offer a re-conceptualization of current practices. We argue that residents represent a largely untapped resource in our attempts to advance the quality of psychosocial care. We propose overturning practices that focus on entertainment and distraction by introducing a new approach that centers on resident contributions and peer support. We offer a model-Resident Engagement and Peer Support (REAP)-for designing interventions that advance residents' social identity, enhance reciprocal relationships and increase social productivity. This model has the potential to revolutionize current psychosocial practice by moving from resident care to resident engagement.