Conducting rapid qualitative interview research during the COVID-19 pandemic—Reflections on methodological choices

Abstract

As the COVID-19 pandemic has shown, setting up studies in time to gather relevant, real-world data enables researchers to capture current views and experiences, focus on practicalities on the ground, and deliver actionable results. Delivering high quality rapid studies in healthcare poses several challenges even in non-emergency situations. There is an expanding literature discussing benefits and challenges of conducting rapid research, yet there are relatively few examples related to methodological dilemmas and decisions that researchers may face when conducting rapid studies. In rapidly-changing emergency contexts, some of these challenges may be more easily overcome, while others may be unique to the emergency, magnified, or emerge in different ways. In this manuscript, we discuss our reflections and lessons learnt across the research process when conducting rapid qualitative interview studies in the context of a healthcare emergency, focusing on methodological issues. By this we mean the challenging considerations and pragmatic choices we made, and their downstream impacts, that shaped our studies. We draw on our extensive combined experience of delivering several projects during the COVID-19 pandemic in both single and multi-country settings, where we implemented rapid studies, or rapidly adapted an existing study. In the context of these studies, we discuss two main considerations, with a particular focus on the complexities, multiple facets, and trade-offs involved in: (i) team-based approaches to qualitative studies; and (ii) timely and rapid data collection, analysis and dissemination. We contribute a transparent discussion of these issues, describing them, what helped us to deal with them, and which issues have been difficult to overcome. We situate our discussion of arising issues in relation to existing literature, to offer broader recommendations while also identifying gaps in current understandings of how to deal with these methodological challenges. We thus identify key considerations, lessons, and possibilities for researchers implementing rapid studies in healthcare emergencies and beyond. We aim to promote transparency in reporting, assist other researchers in making informed choices, and consequently contribute to the development of the rapid qualitative research.

Utilizing rapid qualitative assessment and thematic analysis methods to identify and share promising case investigation and contact tracing practices with people in refugee, immigrant, and migrant communities during COVID-19

“…There has been an expansion and advancement of rapid qualitative methods in the context of urgent public health situations ( 8 , 9 , 32 ). In recent years, however, much of the rapid qualitative analysis literature has centered on either rapid analysis as a singular method or rapid approaches in comparison to more “traditional” qualitative methods, leaving a gap in understanding how such rapid and traditional methods might be used together ( 33 ), as we attempted to do with our analysis.…”

Team-Based Qualitative Rapid Analysis: Approach and Considerations for Conducting Developmental Formative Evaluation for Intervention Design

“…Forming such diverse qualitative research teams may not be feasible for all DFE projects. To assist in planning DFE research teams, we offer guidance on qualitative rapid analysis team selection based on specific knowledge and skill sets, acknowledging that our guidance is similar to others’ guidance for planning rapid qualitative analysis teams for the broader category of health services evaluations (Wanat et al, 2022). First, although the matrix method is appropriate for use in research teams involving members without prior qualitative research experience (Gale et al, 2013), we found it necessary to have at least one experienced qualitative analyst on the rapid analysis team.…”

From voice to ink (VINK): Development and assessment of an automated, free-of-charge transcription tool

“…Despite being inherent to the process of manual transcription, delays can lead to collected data waning in relevance (9) or, as witnessed in COVID-19 (10), becoming obsolete. Many qualitative teams have sought to mitigate transcription delays by forgoing verbatim transcription in favor of selective transcription or via capturing data in the form of field notes and summaries (11,12). While selective transcription and related techniques can facilitate timely results, these approaches can increase the risk for researcher bias and information loss (13).…”