Page 23 - Petelin, Ana, in Helena Skočir. 2020. Ur. Raziskovanje za znanje, znanje za zdravje. Zbornik prispevkov z recenzijo. Koper: Založba Univerze na Primorskem.
P. 23
litative research findings as valid sources uvodno predavanje
of evidence for practice
Stefanos Mantzoukas, PhD, MSc, PgDip Social Research Methods, BSc Health
Studies, BS Nursing, Associate Professor in Nursing
University of Ioannina, Greece
smantzoukas@uoi.gr
The qualitative inquiry has resulted in the last decade into a popularised way
of researching within the health sciences. While such methods of inquiry are
highly popular and very useful in health care, there has been a relative dis-
proportionate significance attributed to qualitative research as evidence for
practice in the evidence-based practice movement. The hierarchy of evidence
in the evidence-based practice pyramid values studies that are objective, val-
ue-free and accurate representation of the participants and therefore exclud-
ing, by all means, the researcher’s representation within the research. This as-
sumption of evidence-based practice pyramid is that the research should be
unbiased and the studies should exclude by all means the researcher from
the study. While this may hold grounds for some inquiries, it is not necessari-
ly the norm or the criteria for evaluating a qualitative inquiry. In this presenta-
tion, I will argue that representation of the researcher in qualitative inquiries
or for that reason in any inquiry is inevitable and the exclusion or not of the
researcher is a mere conventional agreement founded upon a paradigmatic
consensus. Therefore, correlating the “who” is represented in qualitative in-
quiry to the researcher’s explicitly stated epistemological and ontological as-
sumptions. I will conclude by suggesting that the hierarchy of evidence and
the EBP pyramid needs to be abandoned for the findings of qualitative stud-
ies to be useful in the era of evidence-based practice
Keywords: qualitative studies, research evidence, qualitative research
evidence
21
of evidence for practice
Stefanos Mantzoukas, PhD, MSc, PgDip Social Research Methods, BSc Health
Studies, BS Nursing, Associate Professor in Nursing
University of Ioannina, Greece
smantzoukas@uoi.gr
The qualitative inquiry has resulted in the last decade into a popularised way
of researching within the health sciences. While such methods of inquiry are
highly popular and very useful in health care, there has been a relative dis-
proportionate significance attributed to qualitative research as evidence for
practice in the evidence-based practice movement. The hierarchy of evidence
in the evidence-based practice pyramid values studies that are objective, val-
ue-free and accurate representation of the participants and therefore exclud-
ing, by all means, the researcher’s representation within the research. This as-
sumption of evidence-based practice pyramid is that the research should be
unbiased and the studies should exclude by all means the researcher from
the study. While this may hold grounds for some inquiries, it is not necessari-
ly the norm or the criteria for evaluating a qualitative inquiry. In this presenta-
tion, I will argue that representation of the researcher in qualitative inquiries
or for that reason in any inquiry is inevitable and the exclusion or not of the
researcher is a mere conventional agreement founded upon a paradigmatic
consensus. Therefore, correlating the “who” is represented in qualitative in-
quiry to the researcher’s explicitly stated epistemological and ontological as-
sumptions. I will conclude by suggesting that the hierarchy of evidence and
the EBP pyramid needs to be abandoned for the findings of qualitative stud-
ies to be useful in the era of evidence-based practice
Keywords: qualitative studies, research evidence, qualitative research
evidence
21
