| Title |
Using internet-based approaches to collect qualitative data from vulnerable groups: reflections from the field
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Contemporary Nurse, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1080/10376178.2015.1095056 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors | |
| Abstract |
Background Undertaking qualitative research with vulnerable populations is a complex and challenging process for researchers. Traditional and common modes of collecting qualitative data with these groups have been via face-to-face recorded interviews. Method This article reports on three internet-based data collection methods; email and synchronous online interviews, as well as online qualitative survey. Results The key characteristics of using email, sychronous online interviews and an online qualitative survey including the strengths and limitations of each are presented. Reflections and insights on the use of these internet-based data collection methods are provided to encourage researchers to embrace technology and move away from using traditional face-to-face interviews when researching with vulnerable populations. Conclusion Using the internet to collect qualitative data offers additional ways to gather qualitative data over traditional data collection methods. The use of alternative interview methods may encourage participation of vulnerable participants. |
Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 23% |
| New Zealand | 5 | 23% |
| Australia | 3 | 14% |
| United States | 2 | 9% |
| Chile | 1 | 5% |
| Germany | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 5 | 23% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 10 | 45% |
| Members of the public | 7 | 32% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 18% |
| Unknown | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 135 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 7% |
| Researcher | 10 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 10% |
| Unknown | 60 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 18 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 10% |
| Psychology | 13 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 7% |
| Engineering | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 17 | 13% |
| Unknown | 60 | 44% |