Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2013

Open Access 01-12-2013 | Correspondence

Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research

Authors: Nicola K Gale, Gemma Heath, Elaine Cameron, Sabina Rashid, Sabi Redwood

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The Framework Method is becoming an increasingly popular approach to the management and analysis of qualitative data in health research. However, there is confusion about its potential application and limitations.

Discussion

The article discusses when it is appropriate to adopt the Framework Method and explains the procedure for using it in multi-disciplinary health research teams, or those that involve clinicians, patients and lay people. The stages of the method are illustrated using examples from a published study.

Summary

Used effectively, with the leadership of an experienced qualitative researcher, the Framework Method is a systematic and flexible approach to analysing qualitative data and is appropriate for use in research teams even where not all members have previous experience of conducting qualitative research.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Ritchie J, Lewis J: Qualitative research practice: a guide for social science students and researchers. 2003, London: Sage
2.
Ives J, Damery S, Redwod S: PPI, paradoxes and Plato: who's sailing the ship?. J Med Ethics. 2013, 39 (3): 181-185. 10.1136/medethics-2011-100150.CrossRef
3.
Heath G, Cameron E, Cummins C, Greenfield S, Pattison H, Kelly D, Redwood S: Paediatric ‘care closer to home’: stake-holder views and barriers to implementation. Health Place. 2012, 18 (5): 1068-1073. 10.1016/j.healthplace.2012.05.003.CrossRef
4.
Elkington H, White P, Addington-Hall J, Higgs R, Petternari C: The last year of life of COPD: a qualitative study of symptoms and services. Respir Med. 2004, 98 (5): 439-445. 10.1016/j.rmed.2003.11.006.CrossRef
5.
Murtagh J, Dixey R, Rudolf M: A qualitative investigation into the levers and barriers to weight loss in children: opinions of obese children. Archives Dis Child. 2006, 91 (11): 920-923. 10.1136/adc.2005.085712.CrossRef
6.
Barnard M, Webster S, O’Connor W, Jones A, Donmall M: The drug treatment outcomes research study (DTORS): qualitative study. 2009, London: Home Office
7.
Ayatollahi H, Bath PA, Goodacre S: Factors influencing the use of IT in the emergency department: a qualitative study. Health Inform J. 2010, 16 (3): 189-200. 10.1177/1460458210377480.CrossRef
8.
Sheard L, Prout H, Dowding D, Noble S, Watt I, Maraveyas A, Johnson M: Barriers to the diagnosis and treatment of venous thromboembolism in advanced cancer patients: a qualitative study. Palliative Med. 2012, 27 (2): 339-348.
9.
Ellis J, Wagland R, Tishelman C, Williams ML, Bailey CD, Haines J, Caress A, Lorigan P, Smith JA, Booton R, et al: Considerations in developing and delivering a nonpharmacological intervention for symptom management in lung cancer: the views of patients and informal caregivers. J Pain Symptom Manag (0). 2012, 44 (6): 831-842. 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2011.12.274.CrossRef
10.
Gale N, Sultan H: Telehealth as ‘peace of mind’: embodiment, emotions and the home as the primary health space for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder. Health place. 2013, 21: 140-147.
11.
Rashidian A, Eccles MP, Russell I: Falling on stony ground? A qualitative study of implementation of clinical guidelines’ prescribing recommendations in primary care. Health policy. 2008, 85 (2): 148-161. 10.1016/j.healthpol.2007.07.011.CrossRef
12.
Jones RK: The unsolicited diary as a qualitative research tool for advanced research capacity in the field of health and illness. Qualitative Health Res. 2000, 10 (4): 555-567. 10.1177/104973200129118543.CrossRef
13.
Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays N: Analysing qualitative data. British Med J. 2000, 320: 114-116. 10.1136/bmj.320.7227.114.CrossRef
14.
Pope C, Mays N: Critical reflections on the rise of qualitative research. British Med J. 2009, 339: 737-739.
15.
Fairclough N: Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language. 2010, London: Longman
16.
Garfinkel H: Ethnomethodology’s program. Soc Psychol Quarter. 1996, 59 (1): 5-21. 10.2307/2787116.CrossRef
17.
Merleau-Ponty M: The phenomenology of perception. 1962, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul
18.
Svenaeus F: The phenomenology of health and illness. Handbook of phenomenology and medicine. 2001, Netherlands: Springer, 87-108.
19.
Reissmann CK: Narrative methods for the human sciences. 2008, London: Sage
20.
Charmaz K: Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis. 2006, London: Sage
21.
Glaser A, Strauss AL: The discovery of grounded theory. 1967, Chicago: Aldine
22.
Crotty M: The foundations of social research: meaning and perspective in the research process. 1998, London: Sage
23.
Boeije H: A purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative interviews. Qual Quant. 2002, 36 (4): 391-409. 10.1023/A:1020909529486.CrossRef
24.
Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE: Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005, 15 (9): 1277-1288. 10.1177/1049732305276687.CrossRef
25.
Redwood S, Gale NK, Greenfield S: ‘You give us rangoli, we give you talk’: using an art-based activity to elicit data from a seldom heard group. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012, 12 (1): 7-10.1186/1471-2288-12-7.CrossRef
26.
Mishler EG: The struggle between the voice of medicine and the voice of the lifeworld. The sociology of health and illness: critical perspectives. Edited by: Conrad P, Kern R. 1990, New York: St Martins Press, Third
27.
Hodges BD, Kuper A, Reeves S: Discourse analysis. British Med J. 2008, 337: 570-572. 10.1136/bmj.39370.701782.DE.CrossRef
28.
Sandelowski M, Barroso J: Writing the proposal for a qualitative research methodology project. Qual Health Res. 2003, 13 (6): 781-820. 10.1177/1049732303013006003.CrossRef
29.
Ellins J: It’s better together: involving older people in research. HSMC Newsletter Focus Serv Users Publ. 2010, 16 (1): 4-
30.
Phillimore J, Goodson L, Hennessy D, Ergun E: Empowering Birmingham’s migrant and refugee community organisations: making a difference. 2009, York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation
31.
Leamy M, Clough R: How older people became researchers. 2006, York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation
32.
Glasby J, Miller R, Ellins J, Durose J, Davidson D, McIver S, Littlechild R, Tanner D, Snelling I, Spence K: Final report NIHR service delivery and organisation programme. Understanding and improving transitions of older people: a user and carer centred approach. 2012, London: The Stationery Office
33.
Saldaña J: The coding manual for qualitative researchers. 2009, London: Sage
34.
Lincoln YS: Emerging criteria for quality in qualitative and interpretive research. Qual Inquiry. 1995, 1 (3): 275-289. 10.1177/107780049500100301.CrossRef
35.
Mays N, Pope C: Qualitative research in health care: assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ British Med J. 2000, 320 (7226): 50-10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50.CrossRef
36.
Seale C: Quality in qualitative research. Qual Inquiry. 1999, 5 (4): 465-478. 10.1177/107780049900500402.CrossRef
37.
Dingwall R, Murphy E, Watson P, Greatbatch D, Parker S: Catching goldfish: quality in qualitative research. J Health serv Res Policy. 1998, 3 (3): 167-172.
38.
Popay J, Rogers A, Williams G: Rationale and standards for the systematic review of qualitative literature in health services research. Qual Health Res. 1998, 8 (3): 341-351. 10.1177/104973239800800305.CrossRef
39.
Morse JM, Barrett M, Mayan M, Olson K, Spiers J: Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. Int J Qual Methods. 2008, 1 (2): 13-22.
40.
Smith JA: Reflecting on the development of interpretative phenomenological analysis and its contribution to qualitative research in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2004, 1 (1): 39-54.
41.
Polit DF, Beck CT: Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: Myths and strategies. Int J Nurs Studies. 2010, 47 (11): 1451-1458. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2010.06.004.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research
Authors
Nicola K Gale
Gemma Heath
Elaine Cameron
Sabina Rashid
Sabi Redwood
Publication date
01-12-2013
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2013
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-117

Other articles of this Issue 1/2013

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2013 Go to the issue

Debate

Integrating and extending cohort studies: lessons from the eXtending Treatments, Education and Networks in Depression (xTEND) study

Research article

Methodological approaches to population based research of screening procedures in the presence of selection bias and exposure measurement error: colonoscopy and colorectal cancer outcomes in Ontario

Research article

Risk of bias of randomized controlled trials published in orthopaedic journals

Research article

Use of generalised additive models to categorise continuous variables in clinical prediction

Research article

Diagnosing problems with imputation models using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test: a simulation study

Research article

The index ‘Treatment Duration Control’ for enabling randomized controlled trials with variation in duration of treatment of chronic pain patients