Validity and Reliability in Qualitative Research

Question: Discuss about the Validity and Reliability in Qualitative Research. Answer: Introduction: Clear statement of the aim of the research- The research article by Ostaszkiewicz et al. (2014) clearly mentions the aim of the research which was to develop a grounded theory on how Residential aged care facilities (RACF) identify, communicate and deliver continence care needs. Justification of the qualitative methodology- The objective of the research was to explore nurses and PCAs experience in assessing care needs and assess their views on barrier or facilitators to care. It was also aimed to conduct field observation for the development of theory regarding the topic. The grounded theory approach of research is appropriate for this study because it provides systematic inductive methods towards theory development and gaining insight to daily practical and ethical challenges in caring for aged residents (Smith 2015). Detailed critical appraisal using the CASP tool Justification of the research design- The clarity of the research by Ostaszkiewicz et al. (2014) is seen by proper discussion on the use of grounded theory approach by means of theoretical sampling, comparative data analysis, identification of main category and theoretical saturation level. It revealed theoretical sampling will be done through semi-structured interview and observations with RACF staffs. However, one limitation seen after reviewing the article is that no justification has been provided regarding why they are using this design for investigation and why they decided to select particularly grounded theory approach of qualitative research. The clear statement regarding the rationale for selecting this study design would have enhanced the quality of the research article. Whenever any research study is planned, proper justification regarding the reasons for selecting particular design eliminate vagueness in approach and strengthens the purpose of research (Birks and Mills, 2015). Recruitment strategy related to the aim of the research- The researcher has maintained the validity of the research in sample recruitment stage by means of eliminating all source of biasness. The recruitment strategy of selecting only experienced staffs in providing continence care in RACF is commendable as this help to identify real barrier or facilitators despite the required competence in care. In the research article by Jonasson et al. (2011), sample was selected without considering the experience of participants which lead to biasness and inaccuracy in study results and theory development. Ostaszkiewicz et al. (2014) did not provide any explanation regarding why selection on particular sample group was necessary for the study. However, the detail regarding the method of sample recruitment was provided. Nurse and PCAs took part in the interview only after they were given information about the purpose and design of research at a professional network forum. They volunteered to take part in the interview after consulting other colleague who took part in the study. Data collection method- Ostaszkiewicz et al. (2014) purposively selected two RACFs site in Australia for interview and field observation, one was 75 bed not-for-profit RACF in Melbourne and other was 50 bed private RACF in Adelaide. The researcher clearly justified the rationale for selecting two sites as it would help to get a mixture of sample group consisting of registered nurse, enrolled nurse and PCA staff who provide care not just to people with dementia but also with other disorders. Certain limitation in reporting of data collection method is also seen as the researcher has mentioned the use of semi-structure open-ended interview with staff, however no detail is given regarding the explicit method of interview. The detail is given regarding the procedure followed for field observation to collect data. However, the absence of the same detail on interview method significantly reduces the quality and efficacy of reporting research study. This form of error in reporting hampers t he reliability of the research and leads to poor grasp of research approach (Noble and Smith, 2015). Relationship between researcher and participants- While reviewing the article by Ostaszkiewicz et al. (2014), it has been found that nothing has been mentioned regarding factors that may lead to biasness in the study. No confounding variable was identified and no consideration was done regarding how to eliminate confounding elements in the study. The research question was formulated after reviewing the quality of RACF facilities in Australia. The researcher emphasized that care staff need to follow the Code of Ethics For Nurse and Aged Care Act while delivery care, however there is very few published article on how nurses and PCAs enact the rights of patients in care. Hence, the research question was set based on the analysis that there is little research on ethical challenges faced in during caring for aged residents in RACFs. The clarity regarding choice of location is given however sample recruitment stage is not adequately covered. While conducting an investigation, certain unexp ected event changes the course of investigation. In such situations, researcher needs to implication of this change and make some changes in plan in between research (Bowling, A., 2014). However, in this research nothing has been mentioned about the unexpected events which mean no such situation arose during the research to modify the research plan. Consideration of ethical issues in research- The ethical responsibility for good research practices includes seeking approval for conducting research from relevant Research Ethics Committee and following informed consent rules to inform participants about purpose of research, participants rights, potential risk in participation, prospective research benefits and limits of confidentiality (Marshall and Rossman 2014). Ostaszkiewicz et al. (2014) does not mentions the process followed regarding taking approval for conducting research from Ethics Committee which reflects lack of accuracy in ethical responsibility for research. However, the procedure regarding informed consent rule is covered in some part where nurses agreed for interview after being informed about research detail at a professional network forum. Rigour of data analysis- Despite several limitations in the article, the data analysis part has been adequately described by the researcher. It was not purely based on thematic analysis, however certain coding techniques were used to identify different categories and present it in result section. Data analysis was done through open coding, theoretical coding and selective coding techniques to interpret data, construct memos and classify them into different category. The uniformity in data was maintained after higher order concept emerged and basic theme was found. These processes reflect data was effectively extracted to enhance the reliability and validity of the research finding. No consideration regarding potential biases and influences has been made at any stage of the research (Ostaszkiewicz et al. 2014). Statement of findings- The study finding was presented after repeating the purpose of the study. Based on interview and field observation of participants in RACFs, Ostaszkiewicz et al. (2014) gave the theory regarding main problem encountered by staff during work and their response to the problem. The findings are explicit with discussion on experience of work, ethically challenging situations, residents level of dependence and devalued role. Hence, multiple and conflicting information related to addressing continence was provided, but credibility of the finding is not properly covered. Contribution of the research- This finding of the research is important as it gives insight into the different structural factors that prevents cares from fully exercising ethical rights and conduct in care. The researcher suggest new areas where action is needed by government but not areas where the topic could be further explored The researcher provided direction to future course of action by stating that the role of Australian government on addressing structural challenges that significantly hinders staffs performance and affect the delivery of high quality continence care to residents. References Birks, M. and Mills, J., 2015.Grounded theory: A practical guide. Sage. Bowling, A., 2014.Research methods in health: investigating health and health services. McGraw-Hill Education (UK). Jonasson, L.L., Liss, P.E., Westerlind, B. and Berter, C., 2011. Corroborating indicates nurses ethical values in a geriatric ward.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being,6(3). Marshall, C. and Rossman, G.B., 2014.Designing qualitative research. Sage publications. Noble, H. and Smith, J., 2015. Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research.Evidence Based Nursing,18(2), pp.34-35. Ostaszkiewicz, J., O'Connell, B. and Dunning, T., 2014. Ethical challenges associated with providing continence care in residential aged care facilities: Findings from a grounded theory study.Australian and New Zealand continence journal,20(4), pp.179-186. Smith, J.A. ed., 2015.Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods. Sage.