Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Trials 1/2022

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Atrial Fibrillation | Commentary

How to embed qualitative research in trials: insights from the feasibility study of the SAFER trial programme

Authors: Alison Powell, Sarah Hoare, Rakesh Modi, Kate Williams, Andrew Dymond, Cheryl Chapman, Simon Griffin, Jonathan Mant, Jenni Burt

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Qualitative research can enhance the design, conduct and interpretation of trials. Despite this, few trials incorporate qualitative methods, and those that do may not realise their full potential. In this commentary, we highlight how qualitative research can contribute to the design, conduct and day-to-day running of a trial, outlining the working arrangements and relationships that facilitate these contributions. In doing so, we draw on (i) existing frameworks on the role of qualitative research alongside trials and (ii) our experience of integrated qualitative research conducted as part of the feasibility study of the SAFER trial (Screening for Atrial Fibrillation with ECG to Reduce stroke), a cluster randomised controlled trial of screening people aged 70 and above for atrial fibrillation in primary care in England. The activities and presence of the qualitative team contributed to important changes in the design, conduct and day-to-day running of the SAFER feasibility study, and the subsequent main trial, informing diverse decisions concerning trial documentation, trial delivery, timing and content of measures and the information given to participating patients and practices. These included asking practices to give screening results to all participants and not just to ‘screen positive’ participants, and greater recognition of the contribution of practice reception staff to trial delivery. These changes were facilitated by a ‘one research team’ approach that underpinned all formal and informal working processes from the outset and maximised the value of both qualitative and trial coordination expertise. The challenging problems facing health services require a combination of research methods and data types. Our experience and the literature show that the benefits of embedding qualitative research in trials are more likely to be realised if attention is given to both structural factors and relationships from the outset. These include sustained and sufficient funding for qualitative research, embedding qualitative research fully within the trial programme, providing shared infrastructure and resources and committing to relationships based on mutual recognition of and respect for the value of different methods and perspectives. We outline key learning for the planning of future trials.
Trial registration: Screening for atrial fibrillation with ECG to reduce stroke ISRCTN16939438 (feasibility study); Screening for atrial fibrillation with ECG to reduce stroke – a randomised controlled trial ISRCTN72104369.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Woolfall K, Young B, Frith L, Appleton R, Iyer A, Messahel S, et al. Doing challenging research studies in a patient-centred way: a qualitative study to inform a randomised controlled trial in the paediatric emergency care setting. BMJ Open. 2014;4(5):e005045.CrossRef Woolfall K, Young B, Frith L, Appleton R, Iyer A, Messahel S, et al. Doing challenging research studies in a patient-centred way: a qualitative study to inform a randomised controlled trial in the paediatric emergency care setting. BMJ Open. 2014;4(5):e005045.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Bartlam B, Waterfield J, Bishop A, Holden MA, Barlas P, Ismail KM, et al. The role of qualitative research in clinical trial development: the EASE back study. J Mixed Methods Res. 2018;12(3):325–43.CrossRef Bartlam B, Waterfield J, Bishop A, Holden MA, Barlas P, Ismail KM, et al. The role of qualitative research in clinical trial development: the EASE back study. J Mixed Methods Res. 2018;12(3):325–43.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Evans M, Malpass A, Agnew-Davies R, Feder G. Women’s experiences of a randomised controlled trial of a specialist psychological advocacy intervention following domestic violence: a nested qualitative study. PLoS One. 2018;13(11):e0193077.CrossRef Evans M, Malpass A, Agnew-Davies R, Feder G. Women’s experiences of a randomised controlled trial of a specialist psychological advocacy intervention following domestic violence: a nested qualitative study. PLoS One. 2018;13(11):e0193077.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Bouchard K, Tulloch H. Strengthening behavioral clinical trials with online qualitative research methods. J Health Psychol. 2020;25(2):256–65.CrossRef Bouchard K, Tulloch H. Strengthening behavioral clinical trials with online qualitative research methods. J Health Psychol. 2020;25(2):256–65.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Bugge C, Williams B, Hagen S, Logan J, Glazener C, Pringle S, et al. A process for Decision-making after Pilot and feasibility Trials (ADePT): development following a feasibility study of a complex intervention for pelvic organ prolapse. Trials. 2013;14(1):353.CrossRef Bugge C, Williams B, Hagen S, Logan J, Glazener C, Pringle S, et al. A process for Decision-making after Pilot and feasibility Trials (ADePT): development following a feasibility study of a complex intervention for pelvic organ prolapse. Trials. 2013;14(1):353.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference O’Cathain A, Goode J, Drabble SJ, Thomas KJ, Rudolph A, Hewison J. Getting added value from using qualitative research with randomized controlled trials: a qualitative interview study. Trials. 2014;15:215.CrossRef O’Cathain A, Goode J, Drabble SJ, Thomas KJ, Rudolph A, Hewison J. Getting added value from using qualitative research with randomized controlled trials: a qualitative interview study. Trials. 2014;15:215.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Clement C, Edwards SL, Rapport F, Russell IT, Hutchings HA. Exploring qualitative methods reported in registered trials and their yields (EQUITY): systematic review. Trials. 2018;19(1):589.CrossRef Clement C, Edwards SL, Rapport F, Russell IT, Hutchings HA. Exploring qualitative methods reported in registered trials and their yields (EQUITY): systematic review. Trials. 2018;19(1):589.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Wigginton B, Thomson ZO, Sandler CX, Reeves MM. Reflexive intervention development: using qualitative research to inform the development of an intervention for women with metastatic breast cancer. Qual Health Res. 2020;30(5):666–78.CrossRef Wigginton B, Thomson ZO, Sandler CX, Reeves MM. Reflexive intervention development: using qualitative research to inform the development of an intervention for women with metastatic breast cancer. Qual Health Res. 2020;30(5):666–78.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Cheng KKF, Metcalfe A. Qualitative methods and process evaluation in clinical trials context: where to head to? Int J Qual Methods. 2018;17(1):1609406918774212.CrossRef Cheng KKF, Metcalfe A. Qualitative methods and process evaluation in clinical trials context: where to head to? Int J Qual Methods. 2018;17(1):1609406918774212.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Lawton J, Blackburn M, Breckenridge JP, Hallowell N, Farrington C, Rankin D. Ambassadors of hope, research pioneers and agents of change—individuals’ expectations and experiences of taking part in a randomised trial of an innovative health technology: longitudinal qualitative study. Trials. 2019;20(1):289.CrossRef Lawton J, Blackburn M, Breckenridge JP, Hallowell N, Farrington C, Rankin D. Ambassadors of hope, research pioneers and agents of change—individuals’ expectations and experiences of taking part in a randomised trial of an innovative health technology: longitudinal qualitative study. Trials. 2019;20(1):289.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Tomlin Z, deSalis I, Toerien M, Donovan JL. Patient advocacy and patient centredness in participant recruitment to randomized-controlled trials: implications for informed consent. Health Expect. 2014;17(5):670–82.CrossRef Tomlin Z, deSalis I, Toerien M, Donovan JL. Patient advocacy and patient centredness in participant recruitment to randomized-controlled trials: implications for informed consent. Health Expect. 2014;17(5):670–82.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Donovan JL, Rooshenas L, Jepson M, Elliott D, Wade J, Avery K, et al. Optimising recruitment and informed consent in randomised controlled trials: the development and implementation of the Quintet Recruitment Intervention (QRI). Trials. 2016;17(1):283.CrossRef Donovan JL, Rooshenas L, Jepson M, Elliott D, Wade J, Avery K, et al. Optimising recruitment and informed consent in randomised controlled trials: the development and implementation of the Quintet Recruitment Intervention (QRI). Trials. 2016;17(1):283.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Whybrow P, Pickard R, Hrisos S, Rapley T. Equipoise across the patient population: optimising recruitment to a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2017;18(1):140.CrossRef Whybrow P, Pickard R, Hrisos S, Rapley T. Equipoise across the patient population: optimising recruitment to a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2017;18(1):140.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Hennessy M, Hunter A, Healy P, Galvin S, Houghton C. Improving trial recruitment processes: how qualitative methodologies can be used to address the top 10 research priorities identified within the PRioRiTy study. Trials. 2018;19(1):584.CrossRef Hennessy M, Hunter A, Healy P, Galvin S, Houghton C. Improving trial recruitment processes: how qualitative methodologies can be used to address the top 10 research priorities identified within the PRioRiTy study. Trials. 2018;19(1):584.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Rooshenas L, Paramasivan S, Jepson M, Donovan JL. Intensive triangulation of qualitative research and quantitative data to improve recruitment to randomized trials: the QuinteT approach. Qual Health Res. 2019;29(5):672–9.CrossRef Rooshenas L, Paramasivan S, Jepson M, Donovan JL. Intensive triangulation of qualitative research and quantitative data to improve recruitment to randomized trials: the QuinteT approach. Qual Health Res. 2019;29(5):672–9.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Hoddinott P, Britten J, Pill R. Why do interventions work in some places and not others: a breastfeeding support group trial. Soc Sci Med. 2010;70(5):769–78.CrossRef Hoddinott P, Britten J, Pill R. Why do interventions work in some places and not others: a breastfeeding support group trial. Soc Sci Med. 2010;70(5):769–78.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Hesse-Biber S. Weaving a multimethodology and mixed methods praxis into randomized control trials to enhance credibility. Qual Inq. 2012;18(10):876–89.CrossRef Hesse-Biber S. Weaving a multimethodology and mixed methods praxis into randomized control trials to enhance credibility. Qual Inq. 2012;18(10):876–89.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Frost J, Wingham J, Britten N, Greaves C, Abraham C, Warren FC, et al. The value of social practice theory for implementation science: learning from a theory-based mixed methods process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020;20(1):181.CrossRef Frost J, Wingham J, Britten N, Greaves C, Abraham C, Warren FC, et al. The value of social practice theory for implementation science: learning from a theory-based mixed methods process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020;20(1):181.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Wells M, Williams B, Treweek S, Coyle J, Taylor J. Intervention description is not enough: evidence from an in-depth multiple case study on the untold role and impact of context in randomised controlled trials of seven complex interventions. Trials. 2012;13(1):95.CrossRef Wells M, Williams B, Treweek S, Coyle J, Taylor J. Intervention description is not enough: evidence from an in-depth multiple case study on the untold role and impact of context in randomised controlled trials of seven complex interventions. Trials. 2012;13(1):95.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Mannell J, Davis K. Evaluating complex health interventions with randomized controlled trials: how do we improve the use of qualitative methods? Qual Health Res. 2019;29(5):623–31.CrossRef Mannell J, Davis K. Evaluating complex health interventions with randomized controlled trials: how do we improve the use of qualitative methods? Qual Health Res. 2019;29(5):623–31.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Greenhalgh T, Annandale E, Ashcroft R, Barlow J, Black N, Bleakley A, et al. An open letter to The BMJ editors on qualitative research. BMJ. 2016;352:i563.CrossRef Greenhalgh T, Annandale E, Ashcroft R, Barlow J, Black N, Bleakley A, et al. An open letter to The BMJ editors on qualitative research. BMJ. 2016;352:i563.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Drabble SJ, O’Cathain A, Thomas KJ, Rudolph A, Hewison J. Describing qualitative research undertaken with randomised controlled trials in grant proposals: a documentary analysis. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14(1):24.CrossRef Drabble SJ, O’Cathain A, Thomas KJ, Rudolph A, Hewison J. Describing qualitative research undertaken with randomised controlled trials in grant proposals: a documentary analysis. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14(1):24.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Davis K, Minckas N, Bond V, Clark CJ, Colbourn T, Drabble SJ, et al. Beyond interviews and focus groups: a framework for integrating innovative qualitative methods into randomised controlled trials of complex public health interventions. Trials. 2019;20(1):329.CrossRef Davis K, Minckas N, Bond V, Clark CJ, Colbourn T, Drabble SJ, et al. Beyond interviews and focus groups: a framework for integrating innovative qualitative methods into randomised controlled trials of complex public health interventions. Trials. 2019;20(1):329.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Uprichard E, Dawney L. Data diffraction: challenging data integration in mixed methods research. J Mixed Methods Res. 2019;13(1):19–32.CrossRef Uprichard E, Dawney L. Data diffraction: challenging data integration in mixed methods research. J Mixed Methods Res. 2019;13(1):19–32.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Åkerblad L, Seppänen-Järvelä R, Haapakoski K. Integrative strategies in mixed methods research. J Mixed Methods Res. 2021;15(2):152–70.CrossRef Åkerblad L, Seppänen-Järvelä R, Haapakoski K. Integrative strategies in mixed methods research. J Mixed Methods Res. 2021;15(2):152–70.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Richards DA, Bazeley P, Borglin G, Craig P, Emsley R, Frost J, et al. Integrating quantitative and qualitative data and findings when undertaking randomised controlled trials. BMJ Open. 2019;9(11):e032081.CrossRef Richards DA, Bazeley P, Borglin G, Craig P, Emsley R, Frost J, et al. Integrating quantitative and qualitative data and findings when undertaking randomised controlled trials. BMJ Open. 2019;9(11):e032081.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference O’Cathain A, Thomas KJ, Drabble SJ, Rudolph A, Hewison J. What can qualitative research do for randomised controlled trials? A systematic mapping review. BMJ Open. 2013;3(6):e002889.CrossRef O’Cathain A, Thomas KJ, Drabble SJ, Rudolph A, Hewison J. What can qualitative research do for randomised controlled trials? A systematic mapping review. BMJ Open. 2013;3(6):e002889.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Fetters MD, Molina-Azorin JF. Utilizing a mixed methods approach for conducting interventional evaluations. J Mixed Methods Res. 2020;14(2):131–44.CrossRef Fetters MD, Molina-Azorin JF. Utilizing a mixed methods approach for conducting interventional evaluations. J Mixed Methods Res. 2020;14(2):131–44.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Burke Johnson R, Schoonenboom J. Adding qualitative and mixed methods research to health intervention studies: interacting with differences. Qual Health Res. 2016;26(5):587–602.CrossRef Burke Johnson R, Schoonenboom J. Adding qualitative and mixed methods research to health intervention studies: interacting with differences. Qual Health Res. 2016;26(5):587–602.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Maher L, Neale J. Adding quality to quantity in randomized controlled trials of addiction prevention and treatment: a new framework to facilitate the integration of qualitative research. Addiction. 2019;114(12):2257–66.CrossRef Maher L, Neale J. Adding quality to quantity in randomized controlled trials of addiction prevention and treatment: a new framework to facilitate the integration of qualitative research. Addiction. 2019;114(12):2257–66.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference O’Cathain A. A practical guide to using qualitative research with randomized controlled trials. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2018.CrossRef O’Cathain A. A practical guide to using qualitative research with randomized controlled trials. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2018.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Corneli A, Meagher K, Henderson G, Peay H, Rennie S. How biomedical HIV prevention trials incorporate behavioral and social sciences research: a typology of approaches. AIDS Behav. 2019;23(8):2146–54.CrossRef Corneli A, Meagher K, Henderson G, Peay H, Rennie S. How biomedical HIV prevention trials incorporate behavioral and social sciences research: a typology of approaches. AIDS Behav. 2019;23(8):2146–54.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Grant A, Bugge C, Wells M. Designing process evaluations using case study to explore the context of complex interventions evaluated in trials. Trials. 2020;21(1):982.CrossRef Grant A, Bugge C, Wells M. Designing process evaluations using case study to explore the context of complex interventions evaluated in trials. Trials. 2020;21(1):982.CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Russell J, Berney L, Stansfeld S, Lanz D, Kerry S, Chandola T, et al. The role of qualitative research in adding value to a randomised controlled trial: lessons from a pilot study of a guided e-learning intervention for managers to improve employee wellbeing and reduce sickness absence. Trials. 2016;17(1):396.CrossRef Russell J, Berney L, Stansfeld S, Lanz D, Kerry S, Chandola T, et al. The role of qualitative research in adding value to a randomised controlled trial: lessons from a pilot study of a guided e-learning intervention for managers to improve employee wellbeing and reduce sickness absence. Trials. 2016;17(1):396.CrossRef
38.
go back to reference O’Cathain A, Murphy E, Nicholl J. Multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, or dysfunctional? Team working in mixed-methods research. Qual Health Res. 2008;18(11):1574–85.CrossRef O’Cathain A, Murphy E, Nicholl J. Multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, or dysfunctional? Team working in mixed-methods research. Qual Health Res. 2008;18(11):1574–85.CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Curry LA, O’Cathain A, Clark VLP, Aroni R, Fetters M, Berg D. The role of group dynamics in mixed methods health sciences research teams. J Mixed Methods Res. 2012;6(1):5–20.CrossRef Curry LA, O’Cathain A, Clark VLP, Aroni R, Fetters M, Berg D. The role of group dynamics in mixed methods health sciences research teams. J Mixed Methods Res. 2012;6(1):5–20.CrossRef
42.
go back to reference Cooper C, O’Cathain A, Hind D, Adamson J, Lawton J, Baird W. Conducting qualitative research within Clinical Trials Units: avoiding potential pitfalls. Contemp Clin Trials. 2014;38(2):338–43.CrossRef Cooper C, O’Cathain A, Hind D, Adamson J, Lawton J, Baird W. Conducting qualitative research within Clinical Trials Units: avoiding potential pitfalls. Contemp Clin Trials. 2014;38(2):338–43.CrossRef
43.
go back to reference O’Cathain A, Hoddinott P, Lewin S, Thomas KJ, Young B, Adamson J, et al. Maximising the impact of qualitative research in feasibility studies for randomised controlled trials: guidance for researchers. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2015;1(1):32.CrossRef O’Cathain A, Hoddinott P, Lewin S, Thomas KJ, Young B, Adamson J, et al. Maximising the impact of qualitative research in feasibility studies for randomised controlled trials: guidance for researchers. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2015;1(1):32.CrossRef
45.
go back to reference NIH Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences. Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences. 2nd ed. Bethesda: National Institutes of Health; 2018. NIH Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences. Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences. 2nd ed. Bethesda: National Institutes of Health; 2018.
46.
go back to reference Rapport F, Storey M, Porter A, Snooks H, Jones K, Peconi J, et al. Qualitative research within trials: developing a standard operating procedure for a clinical trials unit. Trials. 2013;14(1):54.CrossRef Rapport F, Storey M, Porter A, Snooks H, Jones K, Peconi J, et al. Qualitative research within trials: developing a standard operating procedure for a clinical trials unit. Trials. 2013;14(1):54.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
How to embed qualitative research in trials: insights from the feasibility study of the SAFER trial programme
Authors
Alison Powell
Sarah Hoare
Rakesh Modi
Kate Williams
Andrew Dymond
Cheryl Chapman
Simon Griffin
Jonathan Mant
Jenni Burt
Publication date
01-12-2022
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06308-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Trials 1/2022 Go to the issue