Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T20:43:44.490Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Shape of things to come: factors affecting an ethnographic study in radiation therapy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 March 2011

Susan Merchant ,
Georgia Halkett  and
Moira O’Connor
Susan Merchant*
Affiliation:
WA Centre for Cancer and Palliative Care, Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute, Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
Georgia Halkett
Affiliation:
WA Centre for Cancer and Palliative Care, Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute, Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
Moira O’Connor
Affiliation:
WA Centre for Cancer and Palliative Care, Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute, Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
*
Correspondence to: Susan Merchant, PO Box 703, Brighton, South Australia 5048, Australia. E-mail: Susan.merchant@postgrad.curtin.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The research process is a series of stages necessary to establish the integrity, value, and feasibility of a proposal. Part of the preparation is in understanding the process and factors that can contour a study. The aim of this paper is to outline the hidden factors that may be experienced when undertaking qualitative research. Although the participants are the main players of the study additional influences also require recognition to allow transparency of the project and the researcher’s stance. The guidance of university supervisors has the potential to influence the researcher’s perspective and the effectiveness of the study. Negotiation with clinical staff can add another dimension. Ethics committees are composed of individuals with varied expertise, bringing their points of view into the discussion and decision making, impacting further on the proposed research. It is important for medical radiations professionals who become involved in research to be aware of these factors and how they may influence a project and to acknowledge the impact of the perspectives of the researcher on the project. The significance of this paper is to provide novice researchers, an understanding of the influence, hidden factors play on the results of qualitative research with particular reference to ethnography.

Keywords

Ethnographyqualitative researchradiation therapistsradiation therapyresearch students
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , March 2012 , pp. 23 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

WHO. Working for health: an introduction to the World Health Organization. 2007; Available from: www.who.int.Google Scholar
Lopez, AD. The evolution of the Global Burden of Disease framework for disease, injury and risk factor quantification: developing the evidence base for national, regional and global public health action. Global Health 2005; 1:5.Google Scholar
Wensing, M. Research methods from social science can contribute much to the health sciences. J Clin Epidemiol 2008; 61:519–520.Google Scholar
Nutbeam, D, Boxall, AM. What influences the transfer of research into health policy and practice? Observations from England and Australia. Public Health 2008; 122:747–753.Google Scholar
Kothari, A, Birch, S, Charles, C. “Interaction” and research utilisation in health policies and programs: does it work? Health Policy 2005; 71:117–125.Google Scholar
Jones, LV, Smyth, RL. How to perform a literature search. Curr Paediatr 2004;14:482–488.Google Scholar
Khan, KS, Coomarasamy, A. Searching for evidence to inform clinical practice. Curr Obstet Gynaecol 2004;14:142–146.Google Scholar
Curtin University. HDR Guidelines. Perth: Curtin University 2010; Available from: <http://research.curtin.edu.au/guides/hdrguidelines/appcand.cfm#application>..>Google Scholar
Rice, PL, Ezzy, D. Qualitative Research Methods: A Health Focus. Oxford University Press: South Melbourne, Victoria, 1999.Google Scholar
Mullen, CA, Fish, VL, Hutinger, JL. Mentoring doctoral students through scholastic engagement: adult learning principles in action. J Further High Educ 2010; 34:179–197.Google Scholar
Lee, NJ. Professional doctorate supervision: exploring student and supervisor experiences. Nurse Educ Today 2009; 29:641–648.Google Scholar
Fetterman, DM. Ethnography Step by Step. Sage Publications: Newbury Park; 1989.Google Scholar
DePoy, E, Gitlin, L. Introduction to Research Understanding and Applying Multiple Strategies. Mosby: Philadelphia, USA, 1998.Google Scholar
Bennett, PN. Satellite Haemodialysis Nurses’ Perceptions of Quality Nursing Care: A Critical Ethnography. Flinders University: Adelaide, 2009.Google Scholar
Paech, SE. Totally Different: An Ethnographic Account of Intellectual Disability Nursing. Flinders University: Adelaide, 2007.Google Scholar
Greaves, J. Understanding Palliative Care: An Ethnographic Study of Three Australian Palliative Care Services. [PhD]. In press 2005.Google Scholar
Hardcastle, M-A. The dialectic of control: A critical ethnography of renal nurses’ decision making: James Cook University, 2004.Google Scholar
NHMRC. National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research. National Health and Medical Research Council; 2007; Available from: <http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/health_ethics/human/index.htm>..>Google Scholar
May, T. Social Research Issues, Methods and Process. 3rd edn. Open University Press: Berkshire, 2001.Google Scholar
Goodwin, D, Pope, C, Mort, M, Smith, A. Ethics and ethnography: an experiential account. Qual Health Res 2003; 13:567–577.Google Scholar
Wainwright, D. Can Sociological Research Be Qualitative, Critical and Valid? The Qualitative Report. 1997 July.Google Scholar
McLoughlin, K. Dying to talk: unsettling assumptions toward research with patients at the end of life. Palliat Support Care 2010; 8:371–375.Google Scholar
Moore, L, Savage, J. Participant observation, informed consent and ethical approval. Nurse Res 2002; 9:58–69.Google Scholar
Murphy, E, Dingwall, R. The ethics of ethnography. In: Atkinson P. et al., editor. Handbook of Ethnography. SAGE: London, 2001.Google Scholar
Gerrish, K. Being a ‘marginal native’ dilemmas of the participant observer. Nurse Res 1997;5:25–34.Google Scholar
Association of Social Anthropologists of the UK and the Commonwealth. Ethical Guidelines for Good Research Practice 1999: Available from: <http://www.theasa.org/ethics/guidelines.shtml>..>Google Scholar
Silverman, D. Doing Qualitative Research. 2nd edn. SAGE Publications Ltd: London, 2005.Google Scholar
Holliday, A. Doing and Writing Qualitative Research. 2nd edn. SAGE Publications: London, 2007.Google Scholar
Brewer, JD. Ethnography. Open University Press: Buckingham, 2000.Google Scholar
Ewing, G, Rogers, M, Barclay, S, McCabe, J, Martin, A, Todd, C. Recruiting patients into a primary care based study of palliative care: why is it so difficult? Palliat Med 2004; 18:452–459.Google Scholar
Steinhauser, KE, Clipp, EC, Hays, JC, Olsen, M, Arnold, R, Christakis, NA, Lindquist, JH, Tulsky, JA. Identifying, recruiting, and retaining seriously-ill patients and their caregivers in longitudinal research. Palliat Med 2006; 20:745–754.Google Scholar
Hammersley, M, Atkinson, P. Ethnography: Principles in Practice. 3rd edn. Routledge Taylor & Francis e-library: London, 2007.Google Scholar
Bonner, A, Tolhurst, G. Insider-outsider perspectives of participant observation. Nurse Res 2002; 9:7–19.Google Scholar
Roberts, K, Taylor, B. Nursing Research Processes An Australian Perspective. 2nd edn. Nelson Australia Pty Ltd: Southbank,Victoria, 2002.Google Scholar
Dickson-Swift, V, James, EL, Kippen, S, Liamputtong, P. Risk to researchers in qualitative research on sensitive topics: issues and strategies. Qual Health Res 2008; 18:133–144.Google Scholar
Darra, S. Emotion work and the ethics of novice insider research. J Res Nurs 2008;13:251–261.Google Scholar
Silverman, D. A Very Short, Fairly Interesting and Reasonably Cheap Book about Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications Ltd: London, 2007.Google Scholar
Malacrida, C. Reflexive journaling on emotional research topics: ethical issues for team researchers. Qual Health Res 2007; 17:1329–1339.Google Scholar
Schön, DA. Educating the Reflective Practitioner. Jossey-Bass John Wiley & Sons: San Francisco, 1987.Google Scholar
Mezirow, J et al. Learning as Transformation: Critical Perspectives on a Theory in Progress. Jossey-Bass Inc: San Francisco, 2000.Google Scholar
Cranton, P. Understanding and Promoting Transformative Learning A Guide for Educators of Adults: Jossey-Bass Inc: 1994.Google Scholar
RANZCR. RANZCR Faculty of Radiation Oncology Submission to the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission (NHHRC) on its Terms of Reference and Draft Principles for Australia’s Health System. Sydney.Google Scholar
Delaney, G, Jacob, S, Featherstone, C, Barton, M. The role of radiotherapy in cancer treatment: estimating optimal utilization from a review of evidence-based clinical guidelines. Cancer 2005; 104:1129–1137.Google Scholar
Ellingson, LL. Embodied knowledge: writing researchers’ bodies into qualitative health research. Qual Health Res 2006; 16:298–310.Google Scholar
Denzin, NK, Lincoln, YS. Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In: Denzin, NK, Lincoln, YS, editors. Handbook of Qualitative Research. 2nd edn. SAGE: Thousand Oaks, 2000. pp. 1–28.Google Scholar
Hammersley, M, Atkinson, P. Ethnography: Principles in Practice. 2nd edn. Routledge: London, 1995.Google Scholar
Cottrell, J. Reflective journals in clinical practice for radiation therapy students. J Radiother pract 2006;5:9–16.Google Scholar
Farmer, T, Robinson, K, Elliott, SJ, Eyles, J. Developing and implementing a triangulation protocol for qualitative health research. Qual Health Res 2006; 16:377–394.Google Scholar
Mathison, S. Why triangulate? Educ Res 1988;17:13–17.Google Scholar
Guba, EG, Lincoln, YS. Fourth Generation Evaluation. Sage Publications: Newbury Park, 1989.Google Scholar
Lincoln, YS, Guba, EG. But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation. In: Williams, DD, editor. Naturalistic Evaluation New Directions for Evaluation: Jossey-Bass, 1986.Google Scholar