Qualitative Research and Its Place in Health Research in Nepal

Published in: Kathmandu University Medical Journal, v. 9, no. 4, iss. 36, Oct-Dec. 2011, p. 301-305

Posted on RAND.org on October 01, 2011

by Edwin van Teijlingen, Bibha Simkhada, Maureen Porter, Padam Simkhada, Emma Pitchforth, Prakash Bhatta

Read More

Access further information on this document at www.kumj.com.np

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

There has been a steady growth in recent decades in Nepal in health and health services research, much of it based on quantitative research methods. Over the same period international medical journals such as The Lancet, the British Medical Journal (BMJ), The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and the Journal of Family Planning & Reproductive Health Care and many more have published methods papers outlining and promoting qualitative methods. This paper argues in favour of more high-quality qualitative research in Nepal, either on its own or as part of a mixed-methods approach, to help strengthen the country's research capacity. After outlining the reasons for using qualitative methods, we discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the three main approaches: (a) observation; (b) in-depth interviews; and (c) focus groups. We also discuss issues around sampling, analysis, presentation of findings, reflexivity of the qualitative researcher and theory building, and highlight some misconceptions about qualitative research and mistakes commonly made.

Research conducted by

This report is part of the RAND Corporation external publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.