Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Feb 25;6(1):21.
doi: 10.1186/s43058-025-00701-4.

Development of a method for qualitative data integration to advance implementation science within research consortia

Lisa DiMartino  1   2 , Allison J Carroll  3 , Jennifer L Ridgeway  4 , Anna Revette  5 , Joan M Griffin  4 , Bryan J Weiner  6 , Sandra A Mitchell  7 , Wynne E Norton  7 , Christine Cronin  5 , Andrea L Cheville  8 , Ann Marie Flores  9   10 , Justin D Smith  11   12 ; IMPACT Consortium
Collaborators, Affiliations

Development of a method for qualitative data integration to advance implementation science within research consortia

Lisa DiMartino et al. Implement Sci Commun. .

Abstract

Background: Methods of integrating qualitative data across diverse studies and within multi-site research consortia are less developed than those for integrating quantitative data. The development ofsuchmethods is essential to support the data exchange needed for cross-study qualitative inquiry and given the increasing emphasis on data sharing and open science. We describe methods for qualitative data integration within the National Cancer Institute's Improving the Management of symPtoms During And following Cancer Treatment (IMPACT) Consortium funded by the Cancer MoonshotSM. Data collection and analysis were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Our case study highlights potential solutions for unique challenges faced when integrating qualitative data across multiple settings in a research consortium.

Methods: The IMPACT consortium is comprised of three research centers (RCs) each conducting pragmatic trials examining the effectiveness of routine symptom management on patient-centered outcomes. After reaching consensus on use of CFIR as the common implementation determinant framework, RCs developed a semi-structured interview guide and tailored it to features of their healthcare setting and symptom management interventions. RCs conducted interviews/focus groups with healthcare system partners to examine contextual factors impacting implementation. RCs exchanged 1-2 transcripts (n = 5 total) for purposes of pilot testing the methodology.

Results: Given the heterogeneity of study settings and contexts, it was challenging to simultaneously assign codes at both domain and construct levels and the process was resource intensive. Recommendations include employing a common framework for data collection and analyses from the outset, coding at domain level first and then incorporating construct codes, and centralizing processes via a coordinating center (or similar entity) and combining coded transcripts using qualitative software. We also generated an iteratively refined codebook that employed the CFIR schema and incorporated CFIR 2.0 to provide detailed guidance for coders conducting cross-study qualitative inquiry.

Conclusions: Limited guidance exists on how to support qualitative data integration, data exchange, and sharing across multiple studies. This paper describes a systematic method for employing an implementation determinant framework-guided approach to foster data integration. This methodology can be adopted by other research consortia to support qualitative data integration, cross-site qualitative inquiry, and generate improved understanding of evidence-based intervention implementation.

Keywords: Cancer; Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research; Data integration; Implementation science; Qualitative methods.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate: Institutional Review Board approval was obtained for all 3 RCs in the consortium: Northwestern University (NU IMPACT, #STU00208413), Mayo Clinic (E2C2, #18–007779), and SIMPRO (Western Institutional Review Board #20182593). Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors report no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Implementation Science Workgroup steps and procedures for integrating qualitative data across the IMPACT consortium. RC, Research Center; IRB, Institutional Review Board
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Fortier I, Raina P, Van den Heuvel ER, Griffith LE, Craig C, Saliba M, et al. Maelstrom Research guidelines for rigorous retrospective data harmonization. Int J Epidemiol. 2017;46(1):103–5. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rolland B, Reid S, Stelling D, Warnick G, Thornquist M, Feng Z, et al. Toward Rigorous Data Harmonization in Cancer Epidemiology Research: One Approach. Am J Epidemiol. 2015;182(12):1033–8. - PMC - PubMed
    1. National Cancer Institute. Qualitative methods in implementation science. Accessed 19 March 2024. Available from: https://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/sites/default/files/2020-09/nci-dccps-i....
    1. Dupin CM, Borglin G. Usability and application of a data integration technique (following the thread) for multi- and mixed methods research: A systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2020;108: 103608. - PubMed
    1. Higashi RT, Kruse G, Richards J, Sood A, Chen PM, Quirk L, et al. Harmonizing Qualitative Data Across Multiple Health Systems to Identify Quality Improvement Interventions: A Methodological Framework Using PROSPR II Cervical Research Center Data as Exemplar. Int J Qual Methods. 2023;22:16094069231157344.

LinkOut - more resources