13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Neurotrauma clinicians’ perspectives on the contextual challenges associated with long-term follow-up following traumatic brain injury in low-income and middle-income countries: a qualitative study protocol

      other

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a global public health concern; however, low/middle-income countries (LMICs) face the greatest burden. The WHO recognises the significant differences between patient outcomes following injuries in high-income countries versus those in LMICs. Outcome data are not reliably recorded in LMICs and despite improved injury surveillance data, data on disability and long-term functional outcomes remain poorly recorded. Therefore, the full picture of outcome post-TBI in LMICs is largely unknown.

          Methods and analysis

          This is a cross-sectional pragmatic qualitative study using individual semistructured interviews with clinicians who have experience of neurotrauma in LMICs. The aim of this study is to understand the contextual challenges associated with long-term follow-up of patients following TBI in LMICs. For the purpose of the study, we define ‘long-term’ as any data collected following discharge from hospital. We aim to conduct individual semistructured interviews with 24–48 neurosurgeons, beginning February 2020. Interviews will be recorded and transcribed verbatim. A reflexive thematic analysis will be conducted supported by NVivo software.

          Ethics and dissemination

          The University of Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee approved this study in February 2020. Ethical issues within this study include consent, confidentiality and anonymity, and data protection. Participants will provide informed consent and their contributions will be kept confidential. Participants will be free to withdraw at any time without penalty; however, their interview data can only be withdrawn up to 1 week after data collection. Findings generated from the study will be shared with relevant stakeholders such as the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies and disseminated in conference presentations and journal publications.

          Related collections

          Most cited references34

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Naturalistic inquiry

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study.

              Qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis are two commonly used approaches in data analysis of nursing research, but boundaries between the two have not been clearly specified. In other words, they are being used interchangeably and it seems difficult for the researcher to choose between them. In this respect, this paper describes and discusses the boundaries between qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis and presents implications to improve the consistency between the purpose of related studies and the method of data analyses. This is a discussion paper, comprising an analytical overview and discussion of the definitions, aims, philosophical background, data gathering, and analysis of content analysis and thematic analysis, and addressing their methodological subtleties. It is concluded that in spite of many similarities between the approaches, including cutting across data and searching for patterns and themes, their main difference lies in the opportunity for quantification of data. It means that measuring the frequency of different categories and themes is possible in content analysis with caution as a proxy for significance. © 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2021
                4 March 2021
                : 11
                : 3
                : e041442
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, Division of Neurosurgery , Addenbrooke’s Hospital , Cambridge, UK
                [2 ]departmentNIHR Global Health Research Group on Neurotrauma , University of Cambridge , Cambridge, UK
                [3 ]departmentCollege of Health of Social Care , University of Derby , Derby, UK
                [4 ]departmentNeurosurgery Division, Faculty of Health Sciences , University of Bamenda , Bambili, Northwest Region, Cameroon
                [5 ]departmentDepartment of Neurosurgery , Rwanda Military Hospital , Kigali, Rwanda
                [6 ]departmentDepartment of Neurosurgery , Northwest General Hospital and Research Center , Peshawar, Pakistan
                [7 ]departmentDepartment of Neurosciences and Behaviour Sciences , University of São Paulo , Ribeirao Preto, Brazil
                [8 ]departmentDepartment of Neurosurgery , National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences , Bangalore, India
                [9 ]departmentDivision of Neurosurgery , University of Cape Town , Rondebosch, South Africa
                [10 ]departmentNeurosciences Institute, Department of Neurosurgery , El Bosque University , Bogota, Colombia
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Angelos G Kolias; ak721@ 123456cam.ac.uk

                BGS and CJW are joint first authors.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8471-1368
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9767-2123
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2796-1835
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3992-0587
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8931-3254
                Article
                bmjopen-2020-041442
                10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041442
                7934765
                33664068
                1458eebc-11be-4330-aa1b-b91f99e4f789
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See:  https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 09 June 2020
                : 28 January 2021
                : 10 February 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272, National Institute for Health Research;
                Award ID: 16/137/105
                Categories
                Neurology
                1506
                1713
                Protocol
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                qualitative research,neurosurgery,neurological injury
                Medicine
                qualitative research, neurosurgery, neurological injury

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                8
                0
                9
                0
                Smart Citations
                8
                0
                9
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content136

                Cited by7

                Most referenced authors929