Twelve tips for using rapid research methods in health professions education

References

• Althaus C, Ball S, Bridgman P, Davis G, Threlfall D. 2022. The Australian policy handbook: a practical guide to the policymaking process. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Artino AR, Jr La Rochelle JS, Dezee KJ, Gehlbach H. 2014. Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE Guide No. 87. Med Teach. 36(6):463–474. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2014.889814.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bargate K. 2014. Interactive qualitative analysis-a novel methodology for qualitative research. . Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. 5 (20),11. doi:10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n20p11
   Google Scholar
• Bartlett R, Milligan C. 2020. Diary method: research methods. London: Bloomsbury:
   Google Scholar
• Bastos RA, Carvalho DRDS, Brandão CFS, Bergamasco EC, Sandars J, Cecilio- Fernandes D. 2022. Solutions, enablers and barriers to online learning in clinical medical education during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid review. Med Teach. 44(2):187–195. doi:10.1080/0142159X.2021.1973979.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beebe J. 2014. Rapid qualitative inquiry: A field guide to team-based assessment. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Bell E. 2009. Research for health policy. Oxford: OUP.
   Google Scholar
• Birt L, Scott S, Cavers D, Campbell C, Walter F. 2016. Member checking: a tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation? Qual Health Res. 26(13):1802–1811. doi:10.1177/1049732316654870.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi JJ, Contractor JH, Patel VL, Shapiro MF. 2023. How team clinical reasoning occurs on ward rounds: implications for learning. Clin Teach. 20(4):e13599. doi:10.1111/tct.13599.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clift BC, Gore J, Gustafsson S, Bekker S, Batlle IC, Hatchard J, editors. 2021. Temporality in qualitative inquiry: theories, methods and practices. Oxford: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cook DA, Bordage G, Schmidt HG. 2008. Description, justification and clarification: a framework for classifying the purposes of research in medical education. Med Educ. 42(2):128–133. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02974.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davidoff F, Dixon-Woods M, Leviton L, Michie S. 2015. Demystifying theory and its use in improvement. BMJ Qual Saf. 24(3):228–238. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003627.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dysinger WS, Pappas JM. 2011. A fourth-year medical school rotation in quality, patient safety, and population medicine. Am J Prev Med. 41(4 Suppl 3):S200–S5. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2011.06.011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garritty C, Gartlehner G, Nussbaumer-Streit B, King VJ, Hamel C, Kamel C, Affengruber L, Stevens A. 2021. Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group offers evidence-informed guidance to conduct rapid reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 130:13–22. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.10.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grbich C. 2007. Qualitative data analysis: an introduction. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Guest G, Namey E, Chen M. 2020. A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research. PLoS One. 15(5):e0232076. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0232076.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamel C, Michaud A, Thuku M, Skidmore B, Stevens A, Nussbaumer-Streit B, Garritty C. 2020. Defining rapid reviews: a systematic scoping review and thematic analysis of definitions and defining characteristics of rapid reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 129:74–85. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.09.041.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson GA, Vindrola-Padros C. 2017. Rapid qualitative research methods during complex health emergencies: a systematic review of the literature. Soc Sci Med. 189:63–75. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.07.029.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kekeya J. 2021. Qualitative case study research design: the commonalities and differences between collective, intrinsic and instrumental case studies. Contemporary PNG Studies. 36:28–37.
   Google Scholar
• Kilmann RH. 1983. Producing useful knowledge for organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Lavelle E, Vuk J, Barber C. 2013. Twelve tips for getting started using mixed methods in medical education research. Med Teach. 35(4):272–276. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2013.759645.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawes-Wickwar S, Lovat E, Alao A, Hamer-Hunt J, Yurtoglu N, Jensen C, Clarke N, Roberts N, Park S. 2023. Digital undergraduate medical education and patient and carer involvement: a rapid systematic review of current practice. BMC Med Educ. 23(1):335. doi:10.1186/s12909-023-04218-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lincoln YS, Guba EG. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Malterud K, Siersma V, Guassora AD. 2021. Information power: sample content and size in qualitative studies. In Camic PM, editor, Qualitative research in psychology: expanding perspectives in methodology and design. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association:; p. 67–81.
   Google Scholar
• McGrath C, Palmgren PJ, Liljedahl M. 2019. Twelve tips for conducting qualitative research interviews. Med Teach. 41(9):1002–1006. doi:10.1080/0142159X.2018.1497149.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miles MB, Huberman AM, Saldana J. 2018. Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Sage: London
   Google Scholar
• Motulsky SL. 2021. Is member checking the gold standard of quality in qualitative research? Qualitative Psychology. 8(3):389–406. doi:10.1037/qup0000215.
   Google Scholar
• Neal JW, Neal ZP, VanDyke E, Kornbluh M. 2015. Expediting the analysis of qualitative data in evaluation: A procedure for the rapid identification of themes from audio recordings (RITA). American Journal of Evaluation. 36(1):118–132. doi:10.1177/1098214014536601.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nevedal AL, Reardon CM, Opra Widerquist MA, Jackson GL, Cutrona SL, White BS, Damschroder LJ. 2021. Rapid versus traditional qualitative analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Implementation Sci. 16(1):1–2. doi:10.1186/s13012-021-01111-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norman G, Mason T, Dumville JC, Bower P, Wilson P, Cullum N. 2022. Approaches to enabling rapid evaluation of innovations in health and social care: a scoping review of evidence from high-income countries. BMJ Open. 12(12):e064345. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064345.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pain H. 2012. A literature review to evaluate the choice and use of visual methods. Int J Qual Methods. 11(4):303–319. doi:10.1177/160940691201100401.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patton MQ. 2008. Utilization-focused evaluation. Sage: London
   Google Scholar
• Rankl F, Johnson GA, Vindrola-Padros C. 2021. Examining what we know in relation to how we know it: A team-based reflexivity model for rapid qualitative health research. Qual Health Res. 31(7):1358–1370. doi:10.1177/1049732321998062.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Renfro CP, Rome Zoe, Gatwood J, Hohmeier KC. 2022. Use of rapid assessment procedures when analyzing qualitative data in pharmacy research. Res Social Adm Pharm. 18(1):2249–2253. doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2021.05.013. 34116965.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandars J. 2020. Self-Regulated Learning: the essential factor for understanding and improving academic and clinical performance. Sci Med. 30(1):e36232. doi:10.15448/1980-6108.2020.1.36232.
   Google Scholar
• Sandars J, Goh PS. 2020. How to make it work: a framework for rapid research to inform evidence-based decision–making about the implementation of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. MedEdPublish. 9(:154. doi:10.15694/mep.2020.000154.1.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Saunders B, Sim J, Kingstone T, Baker S, Waterfield J, Bartlam B, Burroughs H, Jinks C. 2018. Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Qual Quant. 52(4):1893–1907. doi:10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smela B, Toumi M, Świerk K, Francois C, Biernikiewicz M, Clay E, Boyer L. 2023. Rapid literature review: definition and methodology. J Mark Access Health Policy. 11(1):2241234. doi:10.1080/20016689.2023.2241234.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smithson J. 2000. Using and analysing focus groups: limitations and possibilities. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 3(2):103–119. doi:10.1080/136455700405172.
   Google Scholar
• Stalmeijer RE, McNaughton N, Van Mook WN. 2014. Using focus groups in medical education research: AMEE Guide No. 91. Med Teach. 36(11):923–939. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2014.917165.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor B, Henshall C, Kenyon S, Litchfield I, Greenfield S. 2018. Can rapid approaches to qualitative analysis deliver timely, valid findings to clinical leaders? A mixed methods study comparing rapid and thematic analysis. BMJ Open. 8(10):e019993., doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019993.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thalmann S, Borntrager V, Treasure-Jones T, Sandars J, Maier R, Widmann K, Kerr M. 2013. Designing scalable informal learning solutions with personas: a pilot study in the healthcare sector. In Scaling up Learning for Sustained Impact: 8th European Conference, on Technology Enhanced Learning, EC-TEL 2013, Paphos, Cyprus, September 17-21, 2013. Proceedings 8. Springer Berlin: Heidelberg. pp. 641–642.
   Google Scholar
• Tricco AC, Antony J, Zarin W, Strifler L, Ghassemi M, Ivory J, Perrier L, Hutton B, Moher D, Straus SE. 2015. A scoping review of rapid review methods. BMC Med. 13(1):224. doi:10.1186/s12916-015-0465-6.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tricco AC, Langlois E, Straus SE. 2017. WHO: rapid reviews to strengthen health policy and systems: a practical guide. Geneva: World Health Organization. https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/258698/9789241512763-eng.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Tricco AC, Straus SE, Ghaffar A, Langlois EV. 2022. Rapid reviews for health policy and systems decision-making: more important than ever before. Syst Rev. 11(1):153. doi:10.1186/s13643-022-01887-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Utarini A, Winkvist A, Pelto G. 2001. Appraising studies in health using rapid assessment procedures (RAP): eleven critical criteria. Human Organization. 60(4):390–400. doi:10.17730/humo.60.4.3xu3p85amf13avtp.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vindrola-Padros C, Vindrola-Padros B. 2018. Quick and dirty? A systematic review of the use of rapid ethnographies in healthcare organisation and delivery. BMJ Qual Saf. 27(4):321–330. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2017-007226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vindrola-Padros C, Johnson GA. 2020. Rapid techniques in qualitative research: a critical review of the literature. Qual Health Res. 30(10):1596–1604. doi:10.1177/1049732320921835.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vindrola-Padros C. 2021a. Rapid ethnographies: a practical guide. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge
   Google Scholar
• Vindrola-Padros C. 2021b. Doing rapid qualitative research. Sage: London
   Google Scholar
• Vindrola-Padros C, Brage E, Johnson GA. 2021. Rapid, responsive, and relevant?: A systematic review of rapid evaluations in health care. Am J Eval. 42(1):13–27. doi:10.1177/1098214019886914.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watkins DC. 2017. Rapid and rigorous qualitative data analysis: the “RADaR” technique for applied research. Int J Qual Methods. 16(1):160940691771213. doi:10.1177/1609406917712131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou B, Calkins C, Jayaraman T, Cassells S, Rotto T, Vaughan L, Srinivasan M, Schillinger E. 2021. Implementing value-added medical education: lessons learned from the student-initiated Stanford frontline COVID-19 consult service. Acad Med. 96(12):1690–1695. doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000004160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar