Within the aims section, the objectives are reinforced using one unambiguous sentence, displaying clear intentions of the study to the reader (Nieswiadomy, 2012). Also, within the findings section the results reflect the aims, the questions are related to competency of physical assessment skills. Stanley M. (2015). Qualitative description: A very good place to start. In Nayar S., Stanley M. (Eds.), Qualitative research methodologies for occupational science and therapy (pp. 21–36). New York: Routledge. [ Google Scholar]

Cislak, A., Formanowicz, M. and Saguy, T. (2018) ‘Bias against research on gender bias’, Scientometrics, 115(1), pp.189-200.

Coyne I. T. (1997). Sampling in qualitative research: Purposeful and theoretical sampling, merging or clear boundaries? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26, 623–630. [ PubMed] [ Google Scholar] Data collection involves the use of data to understand and explain the phenomenon. The primary sources of data collection in qualitative description research are often semistructured in-depth interviews, but other methods are not discounted ( Stanley, 2015). Data collection methods in qualitative description designs can include interviews, focus groups, observation, or document review ( Colorafi & Evans, 2016). However, the use of interviews enables the researcher to explore issues with participants through encouraging depth and rigor, which facilitates emergence of new concepts/issues ( Doody & Noonan, 2013; Fetterman, 1998) and contributes to the “richness of data” required in qualitative description designs.

Richardson, W., Wilson, M., Nishikawa, J. and Hayward, R. (1995). The Well-built Clinical Question: A Key to Evidence-Based Decisions. Annals of Internal Medicine. 123 (3), pp. A12. DOI: 10.7326/ACPJC-1995-12303-A12. Barakat-Johnson, M., Lai, M., Wand, T. and White, K. (2019) ‘A qualitative study of the thoughts and experiences of hospital nurses providing pressure injury prevention and management’, Collegian, 26(1), pp.95-102. Wartolowska, K., Beard, D. and Carr, A. (2018) ‘Blinding in trials of interventional procedures is possible and worthwhile’, Research Method, 6(1), pp.1663-1669. Neergaard M. A., Oleson F., Anderson R., Sondergaard J. (2009). Qualitative description—The poor cousin of health research? BMC Medical Research Methodology, 9, Article 52. [ PMC free article] [ PubMed] [ Google Scholar]From this question clear terms and concepts are defined to reduce the amount of results providing higher quality, relevant evidence (Parahoo, 2014), including synonyms and phrases relating to the key concepts to cover all relevant evidence (Figure 2).

There are numerous databases to apply the search strategy to, for relevance of nursing research, CINAHL and MEDLINE have been chosen for their credibility, and range of sources (Figure 4) (Booth et al., 2016). Patterson B., Morin K. (2012) Methodological considerations for studying social processes. Nurse Researcher, 20, 33–38. [ PubMed] [ Google Scholar]QIP ideas [Internet]. Royal College of General Practitioners. [cited 17 May 2021]. Available from: https://www.rcgp.org.uk/training-exams/training/new-wpba/qip.aspx Parse R. R. (2001). Qualitative inquiry: The path of sciencing. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett. [ Google Scholar] Frowe I. (2001). Language and educational research. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 35, 175–186. [ Google Scholar] Ayres L., Kavanaugh K., Knafl K. A. (2003). Within-case and across-case approaches to qualitative data analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 13, 871–883. [ PubMed] [ Google Scholar] Miles M. B., Huberman A. M., Saldana J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [ Google Scholar]

van Manen M. (1998). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. London, Ontario, Canada: The Althouse Press. [ Google Scholar]

About the contributors

Jirojwong, S., Johnson, M. and Welch, A. (2014). Research Methods in Nursing and Midwifery: Pathways to Evidence-Based Practice. 2 nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. This framework works well with quantitative research, for qualitative research an alternative framework SPICE is preferred, as it allows for perspectives to be incorporated (Booth et al., 2016). There are also variations of the PICO; PICOT, including time frame, PICOS, including study type and PICo. The question formulated will decide on the most applicable framework. Elo S., Kyngas H. (2008). The qualitative content process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62, 107–115. [ PubMed] [ Google Scholar]