An appraisal of the quality of published qualitative dental research

Objectives: To appraise the quality of published qualitative research in dentistry and identify aspects of quality, which require attention in future research. Methods: Qualitative research studies on dental topics were appraised using the critical appraisal skills programme (CASP) appraisal framewo...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology
Main Author: Masood M.; Thaliath E.T.; Bower E.J.; Newton J.T.
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: 2011
Online Access:https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-79956068346&doi=10.1111%2fj.1600-0528.2010.00584.x&partnerID=40&md5=13aa347283129650f05c81514815d26a
id 2-s2.0-79956068346
spelling 2-s2.0-79956068346
Masood M.; Thaliath E.T.; Bower E.J.; Newton J.T.
An appraisal of the quality of published qualitative dental research
2011
Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology
39
3
10.1111/j.1600-0528.2010.00584.x
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-79956068346&doi=10.1111%2fj.1600-0528.2010.00584.x&partnerID=40&md5=13aa347283129650f05c81514815d26a
Objectives: To appraise the quality of published qualitative research in dentistry and identify aspects of quality, which require attention in future research. Methods: Qualitative research studies on dental topics were appraised using the critical appraisal skills programme (CASP) appraisal framework for qualitative research. The percentage of CASP criteria fully met during the assessment was used as an indication of the quality of each paper. Individual criteria were not weighted. Results: Forty-three qualitative studies were identified for appraisal of which 48% had a dental public health focus. Deficiencies in detail of reporting, research design, methodological rigour, presentation of findings, reflexivity, credibility of findings and relevance of study were identified. Problems with quality were apparent irrespective of journal impact factor, although papers from low impact factor journals exhibited the most deficiencies. Journals with the highest impact factors published the least qualitative research. Conclusions: The quality of much of the qualitative research published on dental topics is mediocre. Qualitative methods are underutilized in oral health research. If quality guidelines such as the CASP framework are used in the context of a thorough understanding of qualitative research design and data analysis, they can promote good practice and the systematic assessment of qualitative research. © 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

16000528
English
Article
All Open Access; Bronze Open Access
author Masood M.; Thaliath E.T.; Bower E.J.; Newton J.T.
spellingShingle Masood M.; Thaliath E.T.; Bower E.J.; Newton J.T.
An appraisal of the quality of published qualitative dental research
author_facet Masood M.; Thaliath E.T.; Bower E.J.; Newton J.T.
author_sort Masood M.; Thaliath E.T.; Bower E.J.; Newton J.T.
title An appraisal of the quality of published qualitative dental research
title_short An appraisal of the quality of published qualitative dental research
title_full An appraisal of the quality of published qualitative dental research
title_fullStr An appraisal of the quality of published qualitative dental research
title_full_unstemmed An appraisal of the quality of published qualitative dental research
title_sort An appraisal of the quality of published qualitative dental research
publishDate 2011
container_title Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology
container_volume 39
container_issue 3
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2010.00584.x
url https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-79956068346&doi=10.1111%2fj.1600-0528.2010.00584.x&partnerID=40&md5=13aa347283129650f05c81514815d26a
description Objectives: To appraise the quality of published qualitative research in dentistry and identify aspects of quality, which require attention in future research. Methods: Qualitative research studies on dental topics were appraised using the critical appraisal skills programme (CASP) appraisal framework for qualitative research. The percentage of CASP criteria fully met during the assessment was used as an indication of the quality of each paper. Individual criteria were not weighted. Results: Forty-three qualitative studies were identified for appraisal of which 48% had a dental public health focus. Deficiencies in detail of reporting, research design, methodological rigour, presentation of findings, reflexivity, credibility of findings and relevance of study were identified. Problems with quality were apparent irrespective of journal impact factor, although papers from low impact factor journals exhibited the most deficiencies. Journals with the highest impact factors published the least qualitative research. Conclusions: The quality of much of the qualitative research published on dental topics is mediocre. Qualitative methods are underutilized in oral health research. If quality guidelines such as the CASP framework are used in the context of a thorough understanding of qualitative research design and data analysis, they can promote good practice and the systematic assessment of qualitative research. © 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S.
publisher
issn 16000528
language English
format Article
accesstype All Open Access; Bronze Open Access
record_format scopus
collection Scopus
_version_ 1809677612871581696