PDF
ePub
Citation
Print
Abstract
Purpose:
This study was done to analyze qualitative research published in the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration (JKANA).
Methods:
Selected studies included 38 qualitative studies in which an interview was used and which were published in JKANA from 1995 to 2016 (22 years). Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ), a reporting guideline for analysis of qualitative research was employed.
Results:
Items that were included in less than half of the selected studies were as follows: interviewers’ credentials, occupation, gender, and relationship established with participants in the 1st domain; non-participants, presence of non-participants, and transcripts returned in the 2nd domain; participant checking in the 3rd domain.
Conclusion:
Findings indicate that future challenges face JKANA qualitative researchers. First, the expansion of qualitative research should be ensured to explain complex interaction between humans and the environment. Second, a variety of qualitative research methods should be considered to enhance understanding of nursing fields. Third, research procedures should be described more precisely to increase transparency of research results. Fourth, not only personal information on the researcher but also how subjective opinions of the researcher reflected in the research process should be explained in detail to clarify the relationship between researchers and participants.
Go to : 
REFERENCES
1. Koh MS, Ha NS. Review of the Journal of Korean Nursing Administration Academic Society and its research trends. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. 2001; 7:561–569.
2. Kim JK, Jung MS, Jang KS, Kim JY, Lee HJ, Kim EK, et al. Analysis of the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration for 3 years (2007-2009). Journal of Korean Acad- emy of Nursing Administration. 2010; 16:517–626. https://doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2010.16.4.617.
3. Jang KS, Kim BN, Kim YM, Kim JS, Jeong SH. Analysis of research articles published in the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration for 3 years (2010-2012). Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. 2013; 19(5):679–688. https://doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2013.19.5.679.
4. Lee TW, Park KO, Seomun GA, Kim M, Hwang J, Yu S, et al. Analysis of research articles published in the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration for 3 years (2013-2015): The application of text network analysis. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. 2017; 23(1):101–110. https://doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2017.23.1.101.
5. Seomun KA, Koh MS, Kim IA. Classification of keywords of the papers from the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration (2002-2006). Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. 2007; 13:118–122.
6. Jeong SH, Lee T, Yu S, Seo M. Analysis of manuscripts rejected by the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration [2012-2015 Jun]. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. 2015; 21(5):561–574. https://doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2015.21.5.561.
7. Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. The Sage handbook of qualitative research. 3rd ed.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage;2005.
8. Park MH, Kang SJ. Analysis of the trend in qualitative research and future directions in Korean special education. Korean Journal of Physical, Multiple, & Health Disabilities. 2012; 55(2):205–226.
9. Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. 2nd ed.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage;1998.
10. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. 2007; 19(6):349–357. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042.
11. O'Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, Reed DA, Cook DA. Standards for reporting qualitative research: A synthesis of recommendations. Academic Medicine. 2014; 89(9):1245–1251. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000000388.
12. Blaschke S. The role of nature in cancer patients' lives: A systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis. BMC Cancer. 2017; 17:370. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3366-6.
13. Luker J, Lynch E, Bemhardsson S, Bennett L, Bemhardt J. Stroke survivors' experiences of physical rehabilitation: A systematic review of qualitative studies. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2015; 96(9):1698–1708. e1610.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2015.03.017.
14. Lee EJ, Song JE, Kim M, Kim S, Jun EM, Ahn S, et al. Analysis on reports of qualitative researches published in Korean Jour- nal of Women Health Nursing. Korean Journal of Women Health Nursing. 2012; 18(4):321–332. https://doi.org/10.4069/kjwhn.2012.18.4.321.
15. Park HS, Kim YM. Analysis of qualitative research published by Journal of Korean Academy of Fundamentals of Nursing. Journal of Korean Academy of Fundamentals of Nursing. 2015; 22(4):442–451. https://doi.org/10.7739/jkafn.2015.22.4.442.
16. Kim YK, Hwang SY, Shin SJ. Analysis of qualitative research published by Korean Journal of Adult Nursing (1989-2011). Korean Journal of Adult Nursing. 2011; 23(6):633–641.
17. Nam KA. Analysis of qualitative research in psychiatric and mental health nursing. Journal of Academy of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing. 2014; 23(4):311–321. https://doi.org/10.12934/jkpmhn.2014.23.4.311.
18. Creswell JW. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage;1998.
19. Yarcheski A, Mahon NE, Yarcheski TJ. A descriptive study of research published in scientific nursing journals from 1985 to2010. International Journal of Nursing Studies. 2012; 49(9):1112–1121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.03.004.
20. Gagliardi AR, Umoquit M, Webster F, Dobrow M. Qualitative research publication rates in top-ranked nursing journals: 2002-2011. Nursing Research. 2014; 63(3):221–227. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNR.0000000000000022.
21. Ball E, McLoughlin M, Darvill A. Plethora or paucity: A systematic search and bibliometric study of the application and design of qualitative methods in nursing research 2008-2010. Nurse Education Today. 2011; 31(3):299–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2010.12.002.
22. Shaw RL, Booth A, Sutton AJ, Miller T, Smith JA, Young B, et al. Finding qualitative research: An evaluation of search stra- tegies. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2004; 4:5. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-4-5.
23. Barusch A, Gringeri C, George M. Rigor in qualitative social work research: A review of strategies used in published articles. Social Work Research. 2011; 35(1):11–19. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/35.1.11.
24. Giacomini MK, Cook DJ. Users' guides to the medical literature XXIII. Qualitative Rresearch in health care A. Are the results of the study valid? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 2000; 284(3):357–362. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.284.3.357.
25. Simpson R. Masculinity at work: The experiences of men in female dominated occupation. Work, Employment and Society. 2004; 18:349–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/09500172004042773.
26. Kim M, Park GS, Windsor C. Marital power process of Korean men married to foreign women: A qualitative study. Nursing and Health Sciences. 2013; 15:73–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2018.2012.00738.x.
27. Elder NC, William L. Reading and evaluating qualitative research studies. The Journal of Family Practice. 1995; 41:279–285.
28. Kim YS. Patterns and trends of qualitative research in Korean Social Studies Education. Social Studies Education. 2011; 50(4):1–16.
29. Denzin NK. Sociological Methods. New York: McGraw-Hill;1978.
30. Pearson A, Jordan Z, Lockwood C, Aromataris E. Notions of quality and standards for qualitative research reporting. International Journal of Nursing Practice. 2015; 21(5):670–676. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijn.12331.
Go to :
Table 1.
General Characteristics of Qualitative Research (N=38)
Table 2.
Domain 1: Research Team and Reflexivity (N=38)
Table 3.
Domain 2: Study Design (N=38
Table 4.
Domain 3: Analysis and Findings (N=38)
XML Download