Elevation of practical over basic knowledge, proliferation of qualitative health research studies and

the rise of evidence-based practice as a paradigm and methodology for health care.

The menas of use in the context of qualitative research

Who are the users of qualitative research findings and what are their obligations

For what can and should qualitative research findings be used

Is the evidence-based practice imperative to exploit research findings compatible with the non-
exploitative imperatives of qualitative research?

What use and to whom is all the talk about use in qualitative research? I consider these questions in
this article.

Questions raised when qualitative emerged 1980 that was largely useless because it was not
objective and could not yield generalizable findings. the current urgency about the utility of
qualitative research findings is the result of several converging trends in health care research that
have.

The utility of qualitative research was doubted in 1980 because it is not objective and cannot yield
generalizable findings. Taking as a counter-argument the practical over basic knowledge as the
highest form of knowledge. With the exponential growth of reports of qualitative studies is the
dramatic increase in qualitative methods literature and a need to improve all of the research
findings produced has been overviewed. Viewing now as the top knowledge, practical knowledge
can be focused on use. The focus of use is in the produce of knowledge that discernibly matters to
someone for something and on how to put this knowledge to use. To conclude this criteria, the
author aboard the aspect of the usefulness of the theory (quantitative, ground and heideggerian
hermeneutics), to conclude that the concept is large and need to be focused on the specific research
that the student is using.

Evidence-biased practice, dynamic methodology that follows some criterias. In addition evidence-
biased practice in health care can result in more informed use of evidence, more effective
treatments and accountability in clinical decision making. However, some authors claim that these
method is a retrograde step producing in irreplicable interactions between practitioners and their
patients.

The author claims that with the exponential growth in qualitative health studies there is an urge of
incorporate evidence-biased practices. For this, one of this biased research is the interest in
conducting systematic reviews and integrations of qualitative studies. Following up with the

The authors also say that qualitative research findings lend themselves most obviously to symbolic
and conceptual utilization but less obviously to instrumental utilization. But in the recent years
qualitative researchers showed that the qualitative research can be of material and measurable use
in practice.

Towards the end the author states that the qualitative research must meet several challenges.
Clarifying conceptions of findings  One of the key factors affecting demonstration of the utility of
qualitative research findings is the way they are conceived. The validity of data-based studies is said
to depend primarily of the ability of researchers to show that their findings are empirically grounded
in the data they collected in those studies. In conclusion, the empirical/analytical orientation to
qualitative findings is in line with evidence-based practice as it is typically conceived, but by virtue of
its view of findings as extractable, it may undermine the qualitative research imperative to attend to
particulars as wholes, that is, to take in a research report as a whole and not to anatomize it.
Research reports composed only of uninterpreted stories or excerpts of stories contain no findings
that ca extracted for use in evidence syntheses.

Using Representational styles enabling use  The way qualitative findings are conceived directly
influences how they are presented in reports of qualitative studies and, therefore, their usability. By
that, the author presents some report styles in which the researcher can use for helping conceive its
project.

Adressing the complexity of qualitative metasyntheses  Qualitative metasynthesis itself presents

dilemmas that researchers have yet fully to recognize, address, and resolve. If the synthesis of
qualitative findings remais a challenge, the combination of qualitative and quantitative syntheses
remains uncharted terrain.

Assuming and sharing responsibility for signifying and translading findings  In addition to clarifying
our conception of qualitative findings and becoming more adept and responsible in representing and
synthesizing them, we qualitative health researchers must assume and share responsibility for
signifying and translating them. This presumption calls into question how users, and the relationship
between user groups, are generally conceived of in the research utilization literature.

Determining sample size  The author explains that the amount of size sample needed is influenced
by a number of factors and describes formulas to calculate the sample size.

Data collection and sampling in qualitative research: does size matter?  In which the author
revolves around issues on qualitative research planning and participant selection for individual and
focus group interviews. The selection and analysis of the datas.

Sampling hard to reach populations in qualitative research: The case of incarcerated youth  In this
paper the author tries to indentifies several challenges related to sampling hard to reach populations
that are of particular relevance for qualitative research. The author first present an overview of
qualitative sampling to link it for identify several challenges related to recruiting and sampling hard
to reach populations in qualitative research studies. In addition the author draws as a case of
example the discussion of sampling hard to reach populations as in relation to the assessment of
‘quality’ in qualitative research. The author also adds that one of the major problems in the
recruitment approach is the amount of time required to locate, select and retain participants and
increased difficulties in establishing rapport. In addition, the best sampling method can be the
‘convenience sampling’ that uses both quantitative and qualitative research studies, and can be
defined as reliance n participants who are readily avaible and accessible to the researcher. Towards
the middle the author list the things that the researcher could do to help reaching and work with
hard to reach populations, such as connection with gatekeepers who provides access to a give
population of interest; recruitment orders…
Finally, the author gives a case example of incarcerated youth study

When is it safer to say nothing? Some considerations on biases in sampling  In which the authors
claims that if the study has not been addressed to the common pillars of qualitative research, the
study is likely to produce useless or dangerous and should not even be attempted. In addition the
authors reach out for the factors that may lead to false conclusions on the qualitative research. For
that they describe the importance of sampling. In that the authors specify that the sampling has
three variables that can be used: Universe/population (the group in which the researchers wish to
draw general conclusions; the complete drawn sample (Representative sample on which the
researchers plan to gather data and the achieved sample (the group about whom the researchers
succeed in actually gathering data). With that variables in mind, the authors explain that some
researchers messy with the variables and lost themselves in the middle of the control universe.
Furthermore, the author explains then the control group population with the sampling. A high
response rate will have more conclusions facts than some with lower response, but that could not be
because of the researcher but because of the environment (such as the one described in hard to
reach populations). Finnally, the authors give an overview of what the researcher could do in a
situation of defining sampling and some of the ideas are defining the universe from which you wish
to draw conclusions; approaches to sampling with a sampling frame with sampling by time and
sampling by place and the last size of the sample needed to draw conclusions with confidence that
needs at least two numbers (a) total number of people in the universe (b) the size of phenomenon of
effect which you wish to measure.

Qualitative research sampling: the very real complexities  The paper discuss the limitations of
qualitative research sampling. To introduce the theme the authors presents the steps for the
research process that is: ethichs clearance, negotiation of entrée, data collection, data analysis and
interpretation.

The author also suggests the use of sample framing for decisions on sampling. Coming up with the
selection criteria on the sample frame comes the decision to start with ‘praticality and logistics’.
However, the author also adds the importance of the negotiation with the homes of inquiry for
continuing the process of research. After that comes the selection criteria of the participants, which
he suggests that needs to consider the poblems that may arise with the participants, on the paper
they discarded the ones who are physically incapable or too emotionally disturbed to participate.
With that the group discussion was very homogeneous with different backgrounds and ought not to
know each order in order to foster ‘ contribution by more participants ‘. On the interview section
the purpose was to clarify the sampling and purpose of them. In addition, the authors tries to
explain that the the qualitative study that he was working with data saturation which occurred when
no new information of significance was obtained for ongoing thematic development and theorising.
So the constant comparision of data was used. The researcher tried to find a pattern on the datas.
Them comes the next part of the research that was an in-depth interview for facilitate group
comparision and stimulate a response that was either complementary or oppositional.

This is a research method that utilizes a random selection from the general population. A random
selection is a choosing method that gives all segments of the population an equal chance of
becoming a unit in the testing method. Simple examples of this method include a name in a hat
being picked. Disadvantages with this method would be a chance of obtaining a biased population or
obtaining a population that would relatively ignorant of a certain subject when compared to those
who would be knowledgeable of the subject. This approach is not ideal for my chosen research topic
as the average person that makes up the overall population would not have enough knowledge on
the subject of network performance and QoS to give an informative opinion