Methodological and Practical Issues in Cross-National Qualitative Research: Lessons From the Literature and a Comparative Study of the Experiences of People Receiving a Diagnosis of Cancer

Abstract

Social science and health services research have much to gain from cross-national qualitative research, yet the logistics involved in setting up such studies, especially where different languages and health systems are involved, can seem daunting. In this article, we highlight issues to consider and suggest some solutions, drawing both on the literature and examples from our own cross-national research. We highlight the issues involved with synchronizing staffing and funding, ensuring comparable methods, project management, and communication between research groups, the consequences of the different criteria for ethical approval for recruitment, the challenge of working with multiple languages, teams involving different disciplines and skill sets, and coordinating and timing data collection and analysis. The aim of this article is to draw on the literature, which includes several useful insights, as well as reflections from our own cross-national research, to highlight considerations for cross-national qualitative research teams. Our approach is to highlight and discuss potential challenges and suggest potential solutions, using the format of an illustrated literature review.

Understanding the concept of missed nursing care from a cross‐cultural perspective

“…First, the findings call for scholars' caution in interpreting missed nursing care findings from different cultures, or in comparing levels and types of missed nursing tasks across nations (Blackman et al, ). As a minimum, scholars require at least a working knowledge of the socio‐economic‐political context of the particular research settings or countries where they are working (Chapple & Ziebland, ; Pelzang & Hutchinson, ). Apparently, participants may differently understand the meaning of concepts such as rationed nursing care, missed nursing care, or unfinished nursing care and quantitative analyses may not always capture nuances in the understanding of these terms across cultures.…”

“…Our research team, combined of representatives of the three cultural clusters helped to assure cultural relevance, contextually, appropriateness, mutual respect, and flexibility through active involvement throughout the research stages: formulating the research questions, developing the research tools, and analysing the data. Drafts of the measures and the findings were critiqued by members from the three cultural clusters (Chapple & Ziebland, ; Pelzang & Hutchinson, ).…”

“…formulating the research questions, developing the research tools, and analysing the data. Drafts of the measures and the findings were critiqued by members from the three cultural clusters (Chapple & Ziebland, 2018;Pelzang & Hutchinson, 2019).…”

“…First, the findings call for scholars' caution in interpreting missed nursing care findings from different cultures, or in comparing levels and types of missed nursing tasks across nations (Blackman et al, 2018). As a minimum, scholars require at least a working knowledge of the socio-economicpolitical context of the particular research settings or countries where they are working (Chapple & Ziebland, 2018;Pelzang & Hutchinson, 2019…”

“…But to address MNC, we must first be able to identify, understand, and assess it also from a cross‐cultural perspective. Evidence from cross‐cultural studies may challenge our assumptions about the rationale and inevitability of our own taken‐for‐granted conceptualizations of the phenomenon (Chapple & Ziebland, ). Accordingly, although missed/rationed/unfinished nursing care emerged as a universal phenomenon faced by individuals regardless of cultural differences, (e.g., Jones et al, ), members of different cultures might consider and respond to the phenomenon differently with respect to coping goals, strategies, and outcomes (Chun, Moos, & Cronkite, ; Lam & Zane, ).…”