IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0009400.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Qualitative Analysis of the Interdisciplinary Interaction between Data Analysis Specialists and Novice Clinical Researchers

Author

Listed:
  • Guilherme Roberto Zammar
  • Jatin Shah
  • Ana Paula Bonilauri Ferreira
  • Luciana Cofiel
  • Kenneth W Lyles
  • Ricardo Pietrobon

Abstract

Background: The inherent complexity of statistical methods and clinical phenomena compel researchers with diverse domains of expertise to work in interdisciplinary teams, where none of them have a complete knowledge in their counterpart's field. As a result, knowledge exchange may often be characterized by miscommunication leading to misinterpretation, ultimately resulting in errors in research and even clinical practice. Though communication has a central role in interdisciplinary collaboration and since miscommunication can have a negative impact on research processes, to the best of our knowledge, no study has yet explored how data analysis specialists and clinical researchers communicate over time. Methods/Principal Findings: We conducted qualitative analysis of encounters between clinical researchers and data analysis specialists (epidemiologist, clinical epidemiologist, and data mining specialist). These encounters were recorded and systematically analyzed using a grounded theory methodology for extraction of emerging themes, followed by data triangulation and analysis of negative cases for validation. A policy analysis was then performed using a system dynamics methodology looking for potential interventions to improve this process. Four major emerging themes were found. Definitions using lay language were frequently employed as a way to bridge the language gap between the specialties. Thought experiments presented a series of “what if” situations that helped clarify how the method or information from the other field would behave, if exposed to alternative situations, ultimately aiding in explaining their main objective. Metaphors and analogies were used to translate concepts across fields, from the unfamiliar to the familiar. Prolepsis was used to anticipate study outcomes, thus helping specialists understand the current context based on an understanding of their final goal. Conclusion/Significance: The communication between clinical researchers and data analysis specialists presents multiple challenges that can lead to errors.

Suggested Citation

  • Guilherme Roberto Zammar & Jatin Shah & Ana Paula Bonilauri Ferreira & Luciana Cofiel & Kenneth W Lyles & Ricardo Pietrobon, 2010. "Qualitative Analysis of the Interdisciplinary Interaction between Data Analysis Specialists and Novice Clinical Researchers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(2), pages 1-6, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0009400
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009400
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0009400
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0009400&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0009400?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0009400. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.