Table 2 Quality assessment of qualitative studies

First author, year

Reference

Qualitative approach appropriate?

Aim/literature/theory

Study design

Data collection methods

Validity: Role researcher

Validity: Description context

Validity: Reliability methods

Validity: Rigorous+ /not rigorous - /not sure or not reported ±

Analysis: Rich+ /poor - /not sure or not reported ±

Analysis: Reliable+ /unreliable - / not sure or not reported ±

Analysis: Findings convincing

Analysis: Findings relevant to aim of study

Analysis: Conclusion adequate

Ethical considerations

Appropriate +/inappropriate - /not sure ±

Clear +/unclear- /mixed ±

Defensible +/not defensible - /not sure ±

Appropriate+ /inappropriate - /not sure ±

Clear+ /unclear - /not described ±

Clear+ /unclear- /not sure ±

Reliable/unreliable - /not sure ±

Convincing+ /not convincing - /not sure ±

Relevant+ /irrelevant - /partially relevant ±

Adequate+ /inadequate - / not sure ±

Clear+ /unclear - /not sure or not reported ±