Abstract
In-person interactions have traditionally been the gold standard for qualitative data collection. The COVID-19 pandemic required researchers to consider if remote data collection can meet research objectives, while retaining the same level of data quality and participant protections. We use four case studies from the Philippines, Zambia, India and Uganda to assess the challenges and opportunities of remote data collection during COVID-19. We present lessons learned that may inform practice in similar settings, as well as reflections for the field of qualitative inquiry in the post-COVID-19 era. Key challenges and strategies to overcome them included the need for adapted researcher training in the use of technologies and consent procedures, preparation for abbreviated interviews due to connectivity concerns, and the adoption of regular researcher debriefings. Participant outreach to allay suspicions ranged from communicating study information through multiple channels to highlighting associations with local institutions to boost credibility. Interviews were largely successful, and contained a meaningful level of depth, nuance and conviction that allowed teams to meet study objectives. Rapport still benefitted from conventional interviewer skills, including attentiveness and fluency with interview guides. While differently abled populations may encounter different barriers, the included case studies, which varied in geography and aims, all experienced more rapid recruitment and robust enrollment. Reduced in-person travel lowered interview costs and increased participation among groups who may not have otherwise attended. In our view, remote data collection is not a replacement for in-person endeavours, but a highly beneficial complement. It may increase accessibility and equity in participant contributions and lower costs, while maintaining rich data collection in multiple study target populations and settings.
Funder
Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Vittol Foundation
The Johns Hopkins Catalyst Awards
National Institute of Mental Health
National Institute of Health
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Johns Hopkins Alliance for A Healthier World
UCSF Gladstone
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy
Reference30 articles.
1. Conducting intensive interviews using Email;McCoyd;Qualitative Social Work: Research and Practice,2006
2. Green J , Thorogood N . Qualitative methods for health research. sage, 2018.
3. Saldaña J , Omasta M . Qualitative research: analyzing life. Sage Publications, 2016.
4. But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation
Cited by
73 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献