COREQ
COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research - Lista de comprobación
Esta es una lista de 32 elementos que deberían incluirse en los informes de investigación cualitativa.
Antes de enviar su manuscrito, los/as autores/as deben utilizar esta lista de comprobación para asegurarse de que incluyen toda la información necesaria. Se recomienda revisar cuidadosamente cada criterio y apuntar en qué página del manuscrito se informa sobre él (o si no es de aplicación para la investigación que se presenta).
Elaborado a partir de: Tong Allison; Sainsbury Peter; & Craig J Jonathan (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349-357. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042 (p.352)
Nº |
Item |
Guide questions/Description |
Reported |
Domain 1: Research team and reflexivity |
|||
Personal characteristics |
|||
1 |
Interviewer/facilitator |
Which author/s conducted the interview or focus group? |
|
2 |
Credentials |
What were the researcher’s credentials? E.g. PhD, MD |
|
3 |
Occupation |
What was their occupation at the time of the study? |
|
4 |
Gender |
Was the researcher male or female? |
|
5 |
Experience and training |
What experience or training did the researcher have? |
|
Relationship with participants |
|||
6 |
Relationship established |
Was a relationship established prior to study commencement? |
|
7 |
Participant knowledge of the interviewer |
What did the participants know about the researcher? e.g. personal goals, reasons for doing the research |
|
8 |
Interviewer characteristics |
What characteristics were reported about the inter viewer/facilitator? e.g. Bias, assumptions, reasons and interests in the research topic |
|
Domain 2: Study design |
|||
Theoretical framework |
|||
9 |
Methodological orientation and Theory |
What methodological orientation was stated to underpin the study? e.g. grounded theory, discourse analysis, ethnography, phenomenology, content analysis |
|
Participant selection |
|||
10 |
Sampling |
How were participants selected? e.g. purposive, convenience, consecutive, snowball |
|
11 |
Method of approach |
How were participants approached? e.g. face-to-face, telephone, mail, email |
|
12 |
Sample size |
How many participants were in the study? |
|
13 |
Non-participation |
How many people refused to participate or dropped out? Reasons? |
|
Setting |
|||
14 |
Setting of data collection |
Where was the data collected? e.g. home, clinic, workplace |
|
15 |
Presence of non- participants |
Was anyone else present besides the participants and researchers? |
|
16 |
Description of sample |
What are the important characteristics of the sample? e.g. demographic data, date |
|
Data collection |
|||
17 |
Interview guide |
Were questions, prompts, guides provided by the authors? Was it pilot tested? |
|
18 |
Repeat interviews |
Were repeat inter views carried out? If yes, how many? |
|
19 |
Audio/visual recording |
Did the research use audio or visual recording to collect the data? |
|
20 |
Field notes |
Were field notes made during and/or after the inter view or focus group? |
|
21 |
Duration |
What was the duration of the inter views or focus group? |
|
22 |
Data saturation |
Was data saturation discussed? |
|
23 |
Transcripts returned |
Were transcripts returned to participants for comment and/or correction? |
|
Domain 3: analysis and findings |
|||
Data analysis |
|||
24 |
Number of data coders |
How many data coders coded the data? |
|
25 |
Description of the coding tree |
Did authors provide a description of the coding tree? |
|
26 |
Derivation of themes |
Were themes identified in advance or derived from the data? |
|
27 |
Software |
What software, if applicable, was used to manage the data? |
|
28 |
Participant checking |
Did participants provide feedback on the findings? |
|
Reporting |
|||
29 |
Quotations presented |
Were participant quotations presented to illustrate the themes/findings? Was each quotation identified? e.g. participant number |
|
30 |
Data and findings consistent |
Was there consistency between the data presented and the findings? |
|
31 |
Clarity of major themes |
Were major themes clearly presented in the findings? |
|
32 |
Clarity of minor themes |
Is there a description of diverse cases or discussion of minor themes? |