• To understand the tasks and time required for budgeting and setting realistic project timelines and recruitment targets for research
• To gain insight into the workload associated with conducting qualitative research
• To appreciate the time and effort involved with conducting qualitative interviews with research participants
Background Appropriate costing and allocation of resources is vital to ensure that recruitment to a study is achieved on time and on target. However, there is little guidance concerning the workload associated with qualitative research.
Aim To review the planned versus actual workloads in a qualitative sub-study following elective cardiac surgery in children.
Discussion Parents of children approached for a clinical trial were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview to explore their views about making decisions concerning their children’s participation in the trial. A workload audit was conducted using anticipated points of contact with participants, and the duration of activities identified in the protocol and Health Research Authority statement of activities; these were compared with timed activities documented by the research team.
Conclusion The current system did not anticipate or capture the workload associated with conducting a relatively straightforward qualitative sub-study of a clinical trial with a research-engaged patient group.
Implications for practice Understanding the hidden workload associated with qualitative research is vital in ensuring that project timelines, recruitment targets and funding for research staff are realistic.
Nurse Researcher. 31, 2, 36-43. doi: 10.7748/nr.2023.e1872
Correspondence Peer reviewThis article has been subject to external double-blind peer review and checked for plagiarism using automated software
Conflict of interestNone declared
PermissionTo reuse this article or for information about reprints and permissions, please contact permissions@rcni.com
AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to thank Helen Winmill, Jenna Spry and colleagues in the paediatric intensive care unit research nursing team for assistance in recruitment, as well as the parents who gave their time to be interviewed for the study. This work was supported by a grant from Birmingham Children’s Hospital Research Foundation [BCHRF442]. Julie Menzies was an NIHR 70@70 senior nurse and midwife research leader. Nigel Drury was funded by an Intermediate Clinical Research Fellowship from the British Heart Foundation [FS/15/49/31612]. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, Department of Health and Social Care, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Birmingham Women’s and Children’s NHS Foundation Trust, University of Birmingham or the British Heart Foundation.
Already subscribed? Log in OR Unlock full access to RCNi Plus today Save over 50% on your first 3 months Your subscription package includes: Unlimited online access to all 10 RCNi Journals and their archives Customisable dashboard featuring 200+ topics RCNi Learning featuring 180+ RCN accredited learning modules RCNi Portfolio to build evidence for revalidation Personalised newsletters tailored to your interests Subscribe RCN student member? Try Nursing Standard StudentAlternatively, you can purchase access to this article for the next seven days. Buy now
Or
Comments (0)