Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Evaluation & the Health Professions
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Carey, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, M. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Carey, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, M. W.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Enhancement of Validity Through Qualitative Approaches

Incorporating the Patient's Perspective

Martha Ann Carey

National Center for Nursing Research

Mickey W. Smith

Henry M. Jackson Foundation for, the Advancement of Military Medicine

Validity of research in a medical environment is enhanced through incorporating the patient's perspective by using qualitative approaches. Our efforts to improve the validity of measures led us to examine the research process more broadly through mechanisms ofpatientparticipation: a protocol adviser, a participantadvisory panel, and focus groups. In our research program of biopsychosocial HIVstudies in the military population, feedback from patient participants provided the research staff with information important for refining standard measures, improving the research process, and interpreting the quantitative data analyses.

Evaluation & the Health Professions, Vol. 15, No. 1, 107-114 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/016327879201500107
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 EvaluationHome page
S. Chacon-Moscoso, M. T. Anguera-Argilaga, J. A. Perez-Gil, and F. P. Holgado-Tello
A Mutual Catalytic Model of Formative Evaluation: The Interdependent Roles of Evaluators and Local Programme Practitioners
Evaluation, October 1, 2002; 8(4): 413 - 432.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 J Health PsycholHome page
P. Gallagher and M. Maclachlan
Adjustment to an Artificial Limb: A Qualitative Perspective
J Health Psychol, January 1, 2001; 6(1): 85 - 100.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 American Journal of EvaluationHome page
P. R. Brandon
Stakeholder Participation for the Purpose of Helping Ensure Evaluation Validity: Bridging the Gap Between Collaborative and Non-collaborative Evaluations
American Journal of Evaluation, September 1, 1998; 19(3): 325 - 337.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Int J Soc PsychiatryHome page
R. A. Powell, H. M. Single, and K. R. Lloyd
Focus Groups in Mental Health Research: Enhancing the Validity of User and Provider Questionnaires
International Journal of Social Psychiatry, January 1, 1996; 42(3): 193 - 206.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Qual Health ResHome page
M. A. Carey and M. W. Smith
Capturing the Group Effect in Focus Groups: A Special Concern in Analysis
Qual Health Res, February 1, 1994; 4(1): 123 - 127.
[PDF]