Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research¶
O’Brien. (2014). Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Domain-specific¶
- Peer Debriefing
- Qualitative research methodology — the home use; thematic-analysis literatures, grounded-theory practice, and case-study research all include peer debriefing as an explicit credibility procedure within the Lincoln-Guba set (beside member checking, prolonged engagement, triangulation). Mixed-methods and program evaluation — external peer debriefers brought in mid-analysis to test interpretive frames before reports finalize. Dissertation supervision — the supervisor often performing a peer-debriefing function, with the caveat that grading authority compromises the uninvolved-outsider stance. Qualitative health research — codified as a reportable trustworthiness element under publication standards (COREQ, SRQR)
This sourceReporting standards for qualitative research (SRQR), a 21-item set formulated to improve transparency in reporting.
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
“RESULTS: The Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) consists of 21 items.”
- Qualitative research methodology — the home use; thematic-analysis literatures, grounded-theory practice, and case-study research all include peer debriefing as an explicit credibility procedure within the Lincoln-Guba set (beside member checking, prolonged engagement, triangulation). Mixed-methods and program evaluation — external peer debriefers brought in mid-analysis to test interpretive frames before reports finalize. Dissertation supervision — the supervisor often performing a peer-debriefing function, with the caveat that grading authority compromises the uninvolved-outsider stance. Qualitative health research — codified as a reportable trustworthiness element under publication standards (COREQ, SRQR)
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This work's DOI is recorded above but has not been resolved against an external catalogue, so nothing here confirms the work exists.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:4b04f6bf68d5 · see in the full table