This article describes how nurses can use the Q methodology to include head and neck cancer patients in research. These patients are often excluded from participating in research based on temporary or permanent voiceless, disfigurement, or impaired communication. Q methodology is defined as the method for the study of subjectivity and related procedures seem to facilitate the participation of head and neck cancer patients. As so, this inclusive dimension should be taken into consideration in research project design also as an ethical aspect of the study, in particular when involving these patients or others in similar conditions.
BrayFFerlayJSoerjomataramI, et al.
Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin2018;
68: 394–424.
2.
ChiACDayTANevilleBW.Oral cavity and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma – An update. CA Cancer J Clin2015;
65: 401–421.
3.
GalbiattiALSPadovani-JuniorJAManígliaJV, et al.
Head and neck cancer: Causes, prevention and treatment. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol2013;
79: 239–247.
4.
ReisJBde OliveiraJMNascimentoVF, et al.
Head and neck cancer: Communication and its meanings. Rev Enferm UFPE On Line2018;
12: 3263–3270.
5.
RodriguezCSRoweMThomasL, et al.
Enhancing the communication of suddenly speechless critical care patients. Am J Crit Care2016;
25: e40–e47.
6.
MertlJŽáčkováEŘepováB.Quality of life of patients after total laryngectomy: The struggle against stigmatization and social exclusion using speech synthesis. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol2018;
13: 342–352.
7.
EadieTKapsner-SmithMBoltS, et al.
Relationship between perceived social support and patient-reported communication outcomes across communication disorders: A systematic review. Int J Lang Commun Disord2018;
53: 1059–1077.
8.
YorkstonKBaylorC.Patient-reported outcomes measures: An introduction for clinicians. Perspect Asha Sigs2019;
4: 8–15.
9.
YatesM.Research in nursing practice. Am J Nurs2015;
115: 11.
10.
LockwoodCMeiLY.Evidence-based nursing: A Singaporean perspective. Singapore Nurs J2015;
42: 8–12.
11.
BeckCTHarrisonL.Mixed-methods research in the discipline of nursing. Adv Nurs Sci2016;
39: 224–234.
12.
RamloS.Mixed method lessons learned from 80 years of Q methodology. J Mixed Methods Res2016;
10: 28–45.
13.
Akhtar-DaneshNBaumannACordingleyL.Q-methodology in nursing research: A promising method for the study of subjectivity. West J Nurs Res2008;
30: 759–773.
14.
SimonsJ.An introduction to Q methodology. Nurse Res2013;
20: 28–32.
15.
StoneTEMaguireJKangSJ, et al.
Practical issues of conducting a Q methodology study: Lessons learned from a cross-cultural study. Adv Nurs Sci2017;
40: 291–297.
16.
DennisKE.Q methodology: Relevance and application to nursing research. ANS Adv Nurs Sci1986;
8: 6–17.
17.
LiuMLiYLuA, et al.
Feasibility analysis of the value of Q method in the classification and understanding of expert experience. Chin J Integr Med2013;
19: 869–873.
18.
BoffaDPPawolaLM.Identification and conceptualization of nurse super users. J Healthc Inf Manag2006;
20: 60–68.
19.
LimS-YChangS-O.Nursing home staff members’ subjective frames of reference on residents’ achievement of ego integrity: A Q-methodology study. Jpn J Nurs Sci2018;
15: 17–30.
20.
StoneTTuraleS.Q methodology: An introduction. Pacific Rim Int J Nurs Res2015;
19: 183–186.
21.
YeunEJJeonM.Attitudes about coping with fatigue in patients with gastric cancer: A Q-methodology study. Gastroenterol Nurs2020;
43: 97–105.
22.
MerrickSFarrellD.Head and neck cancer patients’ experiences of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy feeding: A Q-methodology study. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl)2012;
21: 493–504.
23.
HemsleyBBalandinS.A metasynthesis of patient-provider communication in hospital for patients with severe communication disabilities: Informing new translational research. Augment Altern Commun2014;
30: 329–343.
24.
ShumanAGGornickMCBrummelC, et al.
Patient and provider perspectives regarding enrollment in head and neck cancer research. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg2020;
162: 73–78.
25.
EmanuelEJGradyCCCrouchRA, et al. The Oxford Textbook of Clinical Research Ethics.
Oxford, UK:
Oxford University Press, 2008.
26.
BrunnerTHKristyn DiFortunaKDMichael LeTangML, et al.
Using technology to give patients a voice after surgery for head and neck cancer. Clin J Oncol Nurs2016;
20: 474–476.
27.
BarichelloESawadaNOSonobeHM, et al.
Quality of sleep in postoperative surgical oncologic patients. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem2009;
17: 481–488.
28.
PirolaWEPaivaBSRde OliveiraCZ, et al.
Validation of the Brazilian version of the shame and stigma scale (SSS-Br) for patients with head and neck cancers. Palliat Support Care2020;
18: 186–192.
29.
FormigosaJASCostaLSVasconcelosEV.Social representations of patients with head and neck cancer before the alteration of their body image. Revis Pesqui: Cuidado Fundament2018;
10: 180–189.
30.
GrattanKKubrakCCaineV, et al.
Experiences of head and neck cancer patients in middle adulthood: Consequences and coping. Glob Qual Nurs Res. Epub ahead of print 15 March2018. DOI: 10.1177/2333393618760313.
31.
SalanderPIsakssonJGranströmB, et al.
Motives that head and neck cancer patients have for contacting a specialist nurse – An empirical study. J Clin Nurs2016;
25: 3160–3166.
32.
MarbachTJGriffieJ.Patient preferences concerning treatment plans, survivorship care plans, education, and support services. Oncol Nurs Forum2011;
38: 335–342.
33.
BeauchampTLChildressJF.Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 7th ed.
New York:
Oxford University Press, 2013.
34.
ReidKJSwiftAMehannaH.A Q methodology study to investigate the experiences of head and neck cancer patients from diagnosis to 1 year. Eur J Cancer Care2017;
26: e12694.
