Plethora or paucity: A systematic search and bibliometric study of the application and design of qualitative methods in nursing research 2008–2010

Professional doctorates and nursing practice contribution: a systematic literature search and descriptive synthesis

“…Five research papers and three nursing professional doctorate theses were retained. A synthesis table was developed using an approach adapted from Ball et al. (2011) (Table 2).…”

Bibliometric analysis of qualitative research on patients’ experiences of intestinal stoma published between 2002 ‐ 2018

“…Other studies analysed the application and methodology of QR in nursing worldwide. This study considered 240 research studies, of which 180 were defined as descriptive qualitative studies without further elaboration, there being little consensus on what descriptive meant (Ball, McLoughlin, & Darvill, ). According to Squires and Dorsen (), a common mistake in qualitative submissions is that the coding approach is either not described or does not match the study design.…”

“…There is an abundance of studies that classify their work as qualitative in general, but less so of studies that specify theoretical approaches to particular methodologies. In addition, publications that reduce their idea of qualitative to the use of different techniques in isolation, not giving importance to scientific rigour, in terms of citation of methods and analysis employed, predominate (Ball et al, ; Squires & Dorsen, ). It is above all the latter that is the least alluded to among the publications.…”

Qualitative Research Publication Rates in Top-Ranked Nursing Journals

“…Grounded theory, phenomenological, ethnographic, and other approaches have varied over time with no notable increase (Yarcheski et al, 2012). In a set of 240 qualitative studies published between 2008 and 2010 explicitly labeled as qualitative, many failed to cite methodological references or distinguish and define qualitative approaches and methodological terms such as thematic analysis or constant comparative technique were inconsistently applied across studies (Ball, McLoughlin, & Darvill, 2011). In a set of 240 qualitative studies published between 2008 and 2010 explicitly labeled as qualitative, many failed to cite methodological references or distinguish and define qualitative approaches and methodological terms such as thematic analysis or constant comparative technique were inconsistently applied across studies (Ball, McLoughlin, & Darvill, 2011).…”