Skip to main content

Table 2 The rationale for doing the qualitative research described in proposals 1

From: Describing qualitative research undertaken with randomised controlled trials in grant proposals: a documentary analysis

Rationale Summarised statements from proposals and protocols
Patient voice or engagement (1) Engage service users in driving research process. Giving users a ‘voice’ in the evaluation of a health technology of which they will be the recipients
Optimise the trial process / Develop the best processes to maximise the success of the trial (4) Optimise overall trial process
Phase 1: Develop qualitative model to understand perceptions and inform strategies for full trial
Phase 2: Modify trial procedures and documentation in feasibility phase
Improve recruitment and consent procedures for main trial (2) Development of training programme with individual feedback for staff involved in recruitment. Recommend recruitment strategies most likely to promote recruitment into the main trial
To pilot and develop trial procedures including modeling consent procedures for main trial
Generate theories and models to guide intervention development (2) Build conceptual model of [] preferences that will be explored in a subgroup of randomised [participants]
Gain an insider’s perspective from which a theoretical framework regarding subjective experience of service users can be developed
Generate theories to guide the trial and health community (1) Develop theoretical model of HTA practice / Develop a critical understanding of social processes and practices implicated in development, implementation and dissemination of a RCT in the field of HTA
Optimise implementation into clinical practice (6) Inform future development of services of this intervention
Process evaluation will provide important generalizable information for wider health community about acceptability [in service]
  Inform the roll out of the intervention to the wider community
Inform commissioners and service providers to contribute to maximisation of quality and uptake of [intervention]
Assess the feasibility of delivering [intervention] in NHS
Interpret trial findings (especially unexpected findings) (5) Understand and explain any differences in outcome between intervention sites
Insight into possible explanations for differential success of intervention
Interpret trial results to understand why intervention did work / work to further interpret and illuminate the findings from the trial itself
Influence the interpretation of the outcome data / identify unanticipated outcomes and barriers to change
Other (5) Understand, as well as quantify, the process and outcome of care
Bring together the views of different research participants
Explore range of resource use for economic analysis
Provide new insights into patients’ views and experiences of [intervention] and usual care
Provide a richer understanding of patient and carer perceptions to complement quantitative data
  1. 1Numbers in brackets represent the number of incidences that this category or sub-category was mentioned in the proposals we analysed. All text in square brackets has been removed / summarized to maintain anonymity.
\