Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Although multicenter studies proliferate in quantitative health and medical studies, few examples of similar multidisciplinary cross-national qualitative studies exist. In this article, the authors present a commentary on this type of study based on their involvement with two international projects. Issues include maintaining coinvestigators' participation in an international qualitative project with limited funding; difficulties in promoting collaboration in protocol development; factors inhibiting interest and enthusiasm; ethical concerns; issues of data recording, language, coding, and analysis; and implications for write-up and publication. Despite the difficulties and challenges posed at each stage of the process, the authors remain convinced of the value of these projects and provide recommendations for facilitating future multidisciplinary cross-national qualitative health projects.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Begg, C., Cho, M., Eastwood, S., Horton, R., Moher, D., Olkin, I., et al. (1996). Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. Journal of the American Medical Association, 276(8), 637-639.

Connor, L., Treloar, C., & Higginbotham, N. (2001). How to perform transdisciplinary research: Qualitative study designs and methods. In N. Higginbotham, G. Albrecht, & L. Connor (Eds.), Health social science: A transdisciplinary and complexity perspective. South Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.

Fergusson, D., Blair, A., Henry, D., Hishishage, A., Huet, C., Koopman-van Gemert, A., et al. (1999). Technologies to minimise blood transfusion in cardiac and orthopedic surgery: Results of a practice variation survey in ten countries. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 15, 717-728.

Graham, I. D., Alvarez, G., Tetroe, J. M., McAuley, L., & Laupacis, A. (2002). Factors influencing the uptake of technologies to minimize allogeneic transfusion: The perspective of eight Ontario hospitals. Canadian Journal of Surgery, 45(2), 132-140.

Greenhalgh, T., & Taylor, R. (1997). How to read a paper: Papers that go beyond numbers (qualitative research). British Medical Journal, 315(711), 740-743.

Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. London: Sage.

Oyen, E. (1990). The imperfection of comparison. In E. Oyen (Ed.), Comparative methodology: Theory and practice in international research. London: Sage.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). London: Sage.

Pope, C., Ziebland, S., & Mays, N. (2000). Qualitative research in health care: Analysing qualitative data. British Medical Journal, 320(7227), 114-116.

10.

Treloar, C., Graham, I. D., Hewitson, P., Harris, G., Henderson, K., Alvarez, G., et al. (2001). An international comparison of technologies to minimise allogeneic transfusion. Unpublished manuscript.

11.

Treloar, C., Hewitson, P., Henderson, K., Harris, G., Henry, D., & McGrath, K. (2001). Influences on uptake of alternative transfusion techniques: An interview study of national and institutional stakeholders. Internal Medicine Journal, 31, 230-236.

12.

Treloar, C. J., Porteous, J., Hassan, F., Kasniyah, N., Lakshmanudu, M., Sama, M., et al. (1999). The cross cultural context of obesity: INCLEN multicentre collaborative study. Health and Place, 5(4), 279-286.

13.

Winett, R., King, A., & Altman, D. (1989). Health psychology and public health: An integrative approach. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon.

Multidisciplinary Cross-National Studies: A Commentary on Issues of Collaboration,Methodology,Analysis,and Publication

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References