English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This commentary provides additional background and rationale for the use of ethnographic methods to study and explain constructs related to interprofessional practice. In health services and health professions education research there is now firm recognition for the necessary use of qualitative methodology to develop contextually relevant, yet conceptually generalizable findings [1-4]. Many qualitative researchers use the terms ethnographic research or ethnography to describe both an overall research approach and the use of a range of qualitative methods, including observation, interviews, and document and archival analysis. Ethnography is traditionally characterized by 1) a sustained period of research in the field during which the researcher is immersed in the setting, to the extent possible, 2) participant or non-participant observation, which involves the ethnographer’s attempt to understand the participants’ world by actually participating in it, again, to the extent that this is possible, and 3) an operating principle of cultural relativism, that is, an attempt to see the world from the perspective of one’s participants without judgment or bias from one’s own worldview [5]. The ethnographer’s data are collected in the form of field notes, best described as reconstructions and reflections of what s/he saw, did, and heard in the field, written-up in narrative, journal-like fashion [6]. Data analysis involves transforming these descriptions into explanations or interpretive accounts via the development of emergent themes and categories, the identification of negative evidence, also known as deviant cases, and the inductive process of discovering how and why participants make meaning of various social phenomena the way that they do [7]. However, the practice of ethnography is not homogeneous. The ethnographic tradition has a few different histories in different social science domains, such as sociology and anthropology, and is neither conceptualized nor carried out the same by everyone who purports to do it [8]. Ethnography in the anthropological tradition, for instance, might be regarded as relatively flexible in terms of its methodology when compared with ethnography typical in health services and health professions education research [9]. Therefore, as application of, and appreciation for, the principles of ethnography and qualitative research in this field continue to develop, it is important to recognize and be clear about the epistemological and methodological traditions that exist and which differentially inform the way ethnographic research is both carried out and translated to the wider audience. The article “Creating Sustainable Change in the Interprofessional Academic Primary Care Setting: An Appreciative Inquiry Approach” draws from the disciplines of anthropology, organizational behaviour research, and communication studies to advance a conceptual model of change in interprofessional primary care Journal of Research in Interprofessional Practice and Education

Using Ethnographic Methods to Understand Change in Interprofessional Practice