Interviews were conducted by MJ (a female final year BSc honours undergraduate student with prior research internship experience and who first undertook a training module in qualitative research) and JP (a female paediatric occupational therapist with many years of research experience including experience of qualitative interviewing, and an MPhil). Interviewees did not have a prior working relationship with those interviewed but introductions were made at the start of the interview process. Participants were made aware of the goals of the research at the start of the interview. In terms of reflexivity, JP had led on the course development but was keenly aware of the need to avoid bias towards a favourable outcome in her questioning and interpretation. MJ had not been involved in development of the course and had no prior detailed knowledge of the research field; she was therefore in a position of equipoise. Interviews took place either face to face in a quiet office setting or by telephone, at the convenience of the interviewee. They were held on a 1:1 basis, with no observers or other non-participants present. No repeat interviews were undertaken. Interview content was shaped by a topic guide; this was not formally pilot tested but was reviewed by research team members prior to implementation. Interviews began with discussion about the participants’ professional background and prior knowledge of the subject area. This was followed by consideration of what the participant had gained from the training and how it had influenced, or could influence, their practice. The course structure and content were also discussed. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and pseudonymised prior to analysis. Due to the straightforward nature of the interviews, separate field notes were not undertaken and transcripts/findings were not returned to participants for comment.
Officer E., Johnson M., Blickwedel J., Reynolds A., Pearse R., Pearse J, & Basu A.P. (2023). Evaluation of the Training in Early Detection for Early Intervention (TEDEI) e-learning course using Kirkpatrick’s method. BMC Medical Education, 23, 129.
Prior research internship experience of MJ (the female final year BSc honours undergraduate student)
Prior experience of qualitative interviewing of JP (the female paediatric occupational therapist with many years of research experience)
Lack of prior detailed knowledge of the research field by MJ (the female final year BSc honours undergraduate student)
No prior working relationship between interviewers and interviewees
Participants were made aware of the goals of the research at the start of the interview
Interviews were held on a 1:1 basis, with no observers or other non-participants present
Interviews took place either face to face in a quiet office setting or by telephone, at the convenience of the interviewee
Interview content was shaped by a topic guide, which was reviewed by research team members prior to implementation
Interviews began with discussion about the participants' professional background and prior knowledge of the subject area, followed by consideration of what the participant had gained from the training and how it had influenced, or could influence, their practice, and the course structure and content
Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and pseudonymised prior to analysis
positive controls
None explicitly mentioned
negative controls
None explicitly mentioned
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
Etiam vel ipsum. Morbi facilisis vestibulum nisl. Praesent cursus laoreet felis. Integer adipiscing pretium orci. Nulla facilisi. Quisque posuere bibendum purus. Nulla quam mauris, cursus eget, convallis ac, molestie non, enim. Aliquam congue. Quisque sagittis nonummy sapien. Proin molestie sem vitae urna. Maecenas lorem.
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to
get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required