Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/1893/23240
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Lyall, Catherine | en_UK |
dc.contributor.author | King, Emma | en_UK |
dc.date.accessioned | 2016-12-09T23:05:10Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2016-12-09T23:05:10Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2016-05-11 | en_UK |
dc.identifier.other | 267 | en_UK |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1893/23240 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Background Qualitative research has a key role to play in biomedical innovation projects. This article focuses on the appropriate use of robust social science methodologies (primarily focus group studies) for identifying the public’s willingness and preference for emerging medical technologies. Our study was part of the BloodPharma project (now known as the Novosang project) to deliver industrially generated red blood cells for transfusion. Previous work on blood substitutes shows that the public prefers donated human blood. However, no research has been conducted concerning attitudes to stem cell derived red blood cells. Method Qualitative research methods including interviews and focus groups provide the methodological context for this paper. Results Focus groups were used to elicit views from sub-sections of the UK population about the potential use of such cultured red blood cells. We reflect on the appropriateness of that methodology in the context of the BloodPharma project. Findings are in the form of lessons transferable to other interdisciplinary, science-led teams about what a social science dimension can bring; why qualitative research should be included; and how it can be used effectively. Discussion Qualitative data collection offers the strength of exploring ambivalence and investigating the reasons for views, but not necessarily their prevalence in wider society. The inherent value of a qualitative method, such as focus groups, therefore lies in its ability to uncover new information. This contrasts with a quantitative approach to simply ‘measuring’ public opinion on a topic about which participants may have little prior knowledge. We discuss a number of challenges including: appropriate roles for embedded social scientists and the intricacies of doing upstream engagement as well as some of the design issues and limitations associated with the focus group method. | en_UK |
dc.language.iso | en | en_UK |
dc.publisher | BioMed Central | en_UK |
dc.relation | Lyall C & King E (2016) Using qualitative research methods in biomedical innovation: the case of cultured red blood cells for transfusion. BMC Research Notes, 9, Art. No.: 267. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-016-2077-4 | en_UK |
dc.rights | © The Author(s). 2016 This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. | en_UK |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | en_UK |
dc.subject | Cultured red blood cells | en_UK |
dc.subject | Public engagement | en_UK |
dc.subject | Participatory research | en_UK |
dc.subject | Interdisciplinarity | en_UK |
dc.subject | Focus groups | en_UK |
dc.subject | Interviews | en_UK |
dc.subject | Qualitative research | en_UK |
dc.subject | Upstream engagement | en_UK |
dc.title | Using qualitative research methods in biomedical innovation: the case of cultured red blood cells for transfusion | en_UK |
dc.type | Journal Article | en_UK |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1186/s13104-016-2077-4 | en_UK |
dc.identifier.pmid | 27170008 | en_UK |
dc.citation.jtitle | BMC Research Notes | en_UK |
dc.citation.issn | 1756-0500 | en_UK |
dc.citation.volume | 9 | en_UK |
dc.citation.publicationstatus | Published | en_UK |
dc.citation.peerreviewed | Refereed | en_UK |
dc.type.status | VoR - Version of Record | en_UK |
dc.author.email | emma.king@stir.ac.uk | en_UK |
dc.citation.date | 11/05/2016 | en_UK |
dc.contributor.affiliation | University of Edinburgh | en_UK |
dc.contributor.affiliation | Health Sciences Research - Stirling - LEGACY | en_UK |
dc.identifier.scopusid | 2-s2.0-84969235330 | en_UK |
dc.identifier.wtid | 569008 | en_UK |
dc.contributor.orcid | 0000-0003-3611-9647 | en_UK |
dc.date.accepted | 2016-05-04 | en_UK |
dcterms.dateAccepted | 2016-05-04 | en_UK |
dc.date.filedepositdate | 2016-05-30 | en_UK |
rioxxterms.apc | not required | en_UK |
rioxxterms.type | Journal Article/Review | en_UK |
rioxxterms.version | VoR | en_UK |
local.rioxx.author | Lyall, Catherine| | en_UK |
local.rioxx.author | King, Emma|0000-0003-3611-9647 | en_UK |
local.rioxx.project | Internal Project|University of Stirling|https://isni.org/isni/0000000122484331 | en_UK |
local.rioxx.freetoreaddate | 2016-05-30 | en_UK |
local.rioxx.licence | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/|2016-05-30| | en_UK |
local.rioxx.filename | Lyall_and_King_BMC_ResearchNotes_2016.pdf | en_UK |
local.rioxx.filecount | 1 | en_UK |
local.rioxx.source | 1756-0500 | en_UK |
Appears in Collections: | Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Lyall_and_King_BMC_ResearchNotes_2016.pdf | Fulltext - Published Version | 903 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
This item is protected by original copyright |
A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.