Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative studies (COREQ): 32-item checklist

Barriers to medicine use in secondary schools: a qualitative study

Developed from:Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. 2007. Volume 19,Number 6: pp. 349 – 357

No. ItemGuide questions/description

Domain 1: Research

team and reflexivity

Personal Characteristics

1. Inter viewer/facilitatorWhich author/s conducted the inter viewJoseph Cowley was

or focus group?the facilitator – he is

not an author as he did

not contribute to the

paper.2. CredentialsWhat were the researcher’s credentials?BSc, MSc

E.g. PhD, MD

3. OccupationWhat was their occupation at the time of

Research

the study?associate/PhD student4. GenderWas the researcher male or female?Male5. Experience and trainingWhat experience or training did theThe researcher

researcher have?gathered data in a

focus group study at

Strathclyde University

prior to this study in

2009. He had an MSc.

He had also collected

data on community

based health research

projects from 2001 to

2006 including the

NHS Lanarkshire

“Braveheart” Project”Relationship with

participants

6. RelationshipWas a relationship established prior toNoestablishedstudy commencement?

7. Participant knowledgeWhat did the participants know aboutParticipants knew thatof the interviewerthe researcher? e.g. personal goals,the researcher worked

reasons for doing the researchat the University of

Strathclyde in the

Pharmacy Department.8. InterviewerWhat characteristics were reportedParticipants know thecharacteristicsabout the inter viewer/facilitator? e.g.researcher worked in a

Bias, assumptions, reasons andPharmacy Department.

interests in the research topic

Domain 2: study design

Theoretical framework

9. MethodologicalWhat methodological orientation wasInductive thematicorientation and Theorystated to underpin the study? e.g.analysis.

grounded theory, discourse analysis,

ethnography, phenomenology, content

analysis

Participant selection

10. SamplingHow were participants selected? e.g.Purposive/convenience

purposive, convenience, consecutive,– typical users and non

snowballusers of pharmacy

services were selected

on the basis of

demographic

characteristics i.e.

mothers with young

children (from the UK

and immigrants) men

and older people.11. Method of approachHow were participants approached? e.g.Participants were

face-to-face, telephone, mail, emailrecruited through non-

pharmacy or national

health related

voluntary and charity

organisations.12. Sample sizeHow many participants were in the26

study?

13. Non-participation

How many people refused to participateNot applicable –

or dropped out? Reasons?participation was

voluntary.Setting

14. Setting of dataWhere was the data collected? e.g.Localities that werecollectionhome, clinic, workplaceconvenient to

participants in their

community for example

in a community hall15. Presence of non-Was anyone else present besides theNo.participantsparticipants and researchers?

16. Description of sampleWhat are the important characteristics ofGender, age and

the sample? e.g. demographic data,parental status.

date

Data collection

17. Interview guideWere questions, prompts, guidesA topic guide was

provided by the authors? Was it pilot

devised by the

tested?research team and

initial interviews acted

as a pilot.18.Repeat interviewsWere repeat inter views carried out? IfNo.

yes, how many?

19.Audio/visual recordingDid the research use audio or visualData were audio

recording to collect the data?recorded using a digital

recorder.20.Field notesWere field notes made during and/orYes.

after the inter view or focus group?

21.DurationWhat was the duration of the inter viewsOn average 53

or focus group?minutes.22.Data saturationWas data saturation discussed?Yes23.

Transcripts returnedWere transcripts returned to participantsNo

for comment and/or correction?

Domain 3: analysis and

findings

Data analysis

24.Number of dataHow many data coders coded the data?3coders

Lesley MacGregor,

Wendy Gidman.25.Description of theDid authors provide a description of theNot explicitly.coding treecoding tree?

26.Derivation of themesWere themes identified in advance orThis was an

derived from the data?exploratory study.

Analysis was inductive

themes were derived

from the data.27.SoftwareWhat software, if applicable, was usedData were transcribed

to manage the data?verbatim into word

documents by

professional

transcribers. Themes

were groups by cutting

and pasting between

documents.28.Participant checkingDid participants provide feedback on theNo

findings?

Reporting

29.Quotations presentedWere participant quotations presented toYes, identified by

illustrate the themes/findings? Was eachparticipant number

quotation identified? e.g. participant

number

30.Data and findingsWas there consistency between the dataYesconsistentpresented and the fi ndings?

31.Clarity of majorWere major themes clearly presented inYesthemesthe findings?

32.Clarity of minorIs there a description of diverse cases orYes – word countthemesdiscussion of minor themes?restrictions did not

permit more extensive

theme discussion.

Once you have completed this checklist, please save a copy and upload it as part of your submission. When requested to do so as part of the upload process,please select the file type: Checklist. You will NOT be able to proceed with submission unless the checklist has been uploaded. Please DO NOT include thischecklist as part of the main manuscript document. It must be uploaded as a separate file.