IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v18y2025i6d10.1007_s40271-025-00756-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prioritizing Participant and Research Team Emotional Safety During Data Generation and Analysis in Qualitative Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Research: Development of a Framework Informed by the GENDER-Q Youth Study

Author

Listed:
  • Shelby L. Kennedy

    (McMaster University)

  • Susan M. Jack

    (McMaster University
    McMaster University)

  • Natasha Johnson

    (McMaster University)

  • Jennifer Couturier

    (McMaster University)

  • Charlene Rae

    (McMaster University)

  • Anne F. Klassen

    (McMaster University)

Abstract

Conducting applied qualitative health research studies often involves discussion of sensitive topics that may impact the emotional safety of participants and researchers. While generic guidance exists to support researchers in prioritizing participant and researcher emotional safety, specific considerations for conducting virtual qualitative interviews to develop patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) remain limited. This article provides a framework to support PROM developers in prioritizing participant and researcher emotional safety when conducting virtual qualitative interviews. This framework is informed by the strategies developed and applied in the GENDER-Q Youth study, an interpretive descriptive study to develop a PROM for youth receiving gender-affirming care (GENDER-Q Youth). The GENDER-Q Youth study involved virtual concept elicitation interviews with transgender and gender diverse youth (aged 12 years and older) to understand important care-related experiences and outcomes. The interview data were then used to develop draft scales. Virtual cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted with concept elicitation participants to obtain feedback on the draft scales. Strategies to promote participant and researcher emotional safety were developed and implemented throughout data generation (i.e., concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews) and data analysis. On the basis of knowledge gained from creating and applying safety strategies in the GENDER-Q Youth study, a framework was developed to support researchers in prioritizing participant and researcher emotional safety when conducting their respective virtual PROM development studies. This framework offers considerations to support researchers before data generation (e.g., scheduling interviews when support will be available, should an emotional safety concern arise), during data generation (e.g., conducting check-ins with participants), after data generation (e.g., providing opportunities for the interviewing researcher to debrief), and during data analysis (e.g., conducting check-ins with research team members). This framework can help PROM developers identify threats to emotional safety that may occur before, during, and after virtual data generation and during data analysis and facilitate the development of strategies and plans to mitigate these risks.

Suggested Citation

  • Shelby L. Kennedy & Susan M. Jack & Natasha Johnson & Jennifer Couturier & Charlene Rae & Anne F. Klassen, 2025. "Prioritizing Participant and Research Team Emotional Safety During Data Generation and Analysis in Qualitative Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Research: Development of a Framework Informed by the GEN," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 18(6), pages 597-608, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:18:y:2025:i:6:d:10.1007_s40271-025-00756-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-025-00756-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-025-00756-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40271-025-00756-4?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    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:spr:patien:v:18:y:2025:i:6:d:10.1007_s40271-025-00756-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.