2004
DOI: 10.4135/9781849209878
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reworking Qualitative Data

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
538
0
31

Year Published

2007
2007
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 592 publications
(571 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
2
538
0
31
Order By: Relevance
“…In this study, the design, methods, and issues involved are fully reported on so as to be as transparent as possible. Finally, Heaton (2002) brings forward the ethical issue. Where sensitive data is involved, to what extent does secondary analysis violate the contract made between the subjects and the primary researchers?…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this study, the design, methods, and issues involved are fully reported on so as to be as transparent as possible. Finally, Heaton (2002) brings forward the ethical issue. Where sensitive data is involved, to what extent does secondary analysis violate the contract made between the subjects and the primary researchers?…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Qualitative secondary analysis is appropriate when a concept or question is evident within the data but was not specifically explored in the original study (Thorne, 1994;Hinds et al, 1997;Heaton, 2004). Although primary data may lack the precise information required to address the new study's research question(s), the data for this study were scrutinized to confirm their fit for the purpose of analyzing accounts of health care experiences (Dale et al, 1988;Stewart & Kamins, 1993;Heaton, 2004).…”
Section: Secondary Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although primary data may lack the precise information required to address the new study's research question(s), the data for this study were scrutinized to confirm their fit for the purpose of analyzing accounts of health care experiences (Dale et al, 1988;Stewart & Kamins, 1993;Heaton, 2004).…”
Section: Secondary Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our analytical team was composed of both insider (researchers involved in the original studies) and "outsider" (SC-S) perspectives, which when combined addressed both lines of argument. Finally, it is possible that the data selection process may have affected the specific examples provided in the results section; however, we felt that our process of "data sorting" (47) to ensure data fit did not affect the overall themes and findings regarding time-specific priorities, key reasons for shifting, and reasons for condition prioritization that are reflected in the wider multimorbidity literature (25,26).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%