Responses to stigma-related stressors: a qualitative inquiry into the lives of people living with schizophrenia in India

Ethical and methodological issues in qualitative studies involving people with severe and persistent mental illness such as schizophrenia and other psychotic conditions: a critical review

“…Given the complexity of sampling, Paul (2016) explicitly indicates that snowball sampling had to be used owing to difficulties in accessing or approaching participants. Other sampling strategies used to enhance recruitment included the study participant receiving a gift card or reimbursement for travel costs to participate (Barut et al, 2016; de Jager et al, 2016).…”

“…In some cases, this was probably due to the included interview study being part of a larger study (Blixen et al, 2016; Saavedra, López, Gonzáles, & Cubero, 2016; Waite et al, 2016). Nevertheless, for most of the studies recruitment was performed by the healthcare staff or clinicians, who approached eligible candidates for the studies in their daily work (Barut et al, 2016; Bjørkedal et al, 2016; Jones et al, 2016; Kidd et al, 2016; Landon et al, 2016; Paul, 2016; Rhodes et al, 2016; van Langen et al, 2016). …”

“…This process needs to maintain the original meaning of the statements when they are condensed, abstracted and labelled at a more abstract level to contribute to structured knowledge in the studied field. One of the authors in the reviewed articles was usually responsible for the main analysis and the other authors served as additional evaluators in the analysis procedure (Bjørkedal et al, 2016; Kidd et al, 2016; Paul, 2016; Rhodes et al, 2016). Others went a step further, and included more than one author to independently read the transcripts and initial analysis (Barut et al, 2016; Blixen et al, 2016; Burke et al, 2016; Jones et al, 2016; Landon et al, 2016; Saavedra et al, 2016; Topor et al, 2016; van Langen et al, 2016; Waite et al, 2016).…”

“…Besides the authors cross-checking and discussing the content during the analysis process, some of the included studies used member checks to ensure the accuracy of the experience and to make sure that the underlying meaning of all the statements was preserved when they were abstracted into categories and themes (de Jager et al, 2016; Kidd et al, 2016; Paul, 2016; Singh et al, 2016; van Langen et al, 2016). This was done, for example, by summarizing the findings at the end of the interview or by checking field notes with the participant (Kidd et al, 2016; Paul, 2016; van Langen et al, 2016). Participants could also review and discuss preliminary findings as well as member checks with others who were not involved in the study, such as an advisory group of people or a subsample with experience of mental illness (Kidd et al, 2016; Singh et al, 2016).…”

“…Recruited from mental health service providers and associated networksThematic analysisEthical approval and issues unclear. Participants were invited to bring a support person to the interview but all declinedThe authors mention that the sample was smallPaul (2016), IndiaResponses to stigma-related stressors: A qualitative inquiry into the lives of people living with schizophrenia in IndiaTo shed light on conditions and factors that either promote or hinder coping with stigma among people living with schizophreniaQualitative interpretive design considering multiple intersectionalities; face-to-face in-depth interviews, using an open-ended interview guide20 participants diagnosed with schizophrenia and/or schizophrenia-related disorder. Purposive and snowball sampling strategies were used due to poor social visibility of people living with schizophrenia, and locating and recruiting them was challenging.…”