An extra care community's perceived priorities for ‘whole system’ relationships: a Q-methodological study

Grimshaw, Paul; McGowan, Linda; McNichol, Elaine

doi:10.1111/hsc.12417

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 52 publications

(77 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Q-methodological studies in healthcare included a diverse range of stakeholders (e.g., patients, doctors, nurses, informal caregivers, medical students), which could be broadly classified as those receiving or consuming care (consumers) or those delivering or organising formal care (providers). Thirty studies (10.4%) [ 27 , 53 , 59 , 64 , 81 – 106 ] involved both consumer and provider participants. Four of these studies [ 87 , 92 , 105 , 107 ] did not clearly report the breakdown between the types of participants.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review of Q-methodology in healthcare research

Churruca

Ludlow

et al. 2021

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Q-methodology is an approach to studying complex issues of human ‘subjectivity’. Although this approach was developed in the early twentieth century, the value of Q-methodology in healthcare was not recognised until relatively recently. The aim of this review was to scope the empirical healthcare literature to examine the extent to which Q-methodology has been utilised in healthcare over time, including how it has been used and for what purposes. Methods A search of three electronic databases (Scopus, EBSCO-CINAHL Complete, Medline) was conducted. No date restriction was applied. A title and abstract review, followed by a full-text review, was conducted by a team of five reviewers. Included articles were English-language, peer-reviewed journal articles that used Q-methodology (both Q-sorting and inverted factor analysis) in healthcare settings. The following data items were extracted into a purpose-designed Excel spreadsheet: study details (e.g., setting, country, year), reasons for using Q-methodology, healthcare topic area, participants (type and number), materials (e.g., ranking anchors and Q-set), methods (e.g., development of the Q-set, analysis), study results, and study implications. Data synthesis was descriptive in nature and involved frequency counting, open coding and the organisation by data items. Results Of the 2,302 articles identified by the search, 289 studies were included in this review. We found evidence of increased use of Q-methodology in healthcare, particularly over the last 5 years. However, this research remains diffuse, spread across a large number of journals and topic areas. In a number of studies, we identified limitations in the reporting of methods, such as insufficient information on how authors derived their Q-set, what types of analyses they performed, and the amount of variance explained. Conclusions Although Q-methodology is increasingly being adopted in healthcare research, it still appears to be relatively novel. This review highlight commonalities in how the method has been used, areas of application, and the potential value of the approach. To facilitate reporting of Q-methodological studies, we present a checklist of details that should be included for publication.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review of Q-methodology in healthcare research

Churruca

Ludlow

et al. 2021

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The wider policy implications of the value of ECH hinge upon its part in an integrated system of care. This is noted in a study which showed that ECH could act as a "powerful and effective resource" (Grimshaw et al, 2017(Grimshaw et al, , p. 1169).…”

Section: Implications For Practice and Researchmentioning

confidence: 90%

Extra care housing: exploring motivations, expectations and perceptions

Buckland

Tinker²

2020

HCS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore and compare the motivations and expectations that older people have when choosing to move into either a private or housing association (HA) extra care housing (ECH) scheme, and any effects this had on its residents. Design/methodology/approach This qualitative study is based on findings from four HA schemes in Tower Hamlets, London, and one private scheme in Warwickshire. Eight semi-structured interviews were conducted with five women and three men of varying backgrounds, from schemes managed by different associations and companies. Interview transcripts were coded and analysed thematically. Findings All residents moved into ECH in response to deteriorating health. However, almost all residents had felt obliged to move by others, generally their children. Few residents had any expectations of ECH on arrival, but many developed high expectations of an increased sense of independence and security and of an improved social life. ECH appeared to be beneficial for residents’ health and well-being. Research limitations/implications The inability to recruit an equal number of people from HA and private scheme, alongside the small sample size, may compromise the external validity of any conclusions drawn from any comparisons. Practical implications This research identifies a lack of knowledge about ECH among the general population and offers insight into areas of poor management within ECH schemes which could be improved. Social implications Inadequacies in the ECH model could be attributed to failures in the current health and social care system. Differences between expectations and perceptions of HA vs private schemes should be acknowledged and responded to. Originality/value This is a rare example of research exploring the relationships between ECH residents’ motivations and expectations (Hillcoat-Nallétamby and Sardani, 2019), and between those in HA vs private schemes.

show abstract

“…However, the framework or means to ensure that the concourse is fully representative of the opinions available on the topic is rarely articulated. Articles selected were published between 1996 (Brown 1996) and 2017 (Dune et al, 2017;Grimshaw et al 2017). Generally, the type of concourse data identified are articulated as textual statements.…”

Section: Analysis and Interpretation Of Datamentioning

confidence: 99%