A qualitative research method has many features that affect the process and results of the study since it requires objectivity and accuracy. Researchers can choose the wrong research tools, be biased in the process of composing questions, or interpreting the results. However, an article by Aruru et al. is a perfect example of a study that uses a qualitative research method, shows virtually no shortcomings, and has practical application in the healthcare system.
This article is an example of relevant and high-quality work as it complies with the standards of scientific research and studies the latest concerning issues. The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated the weaknesses of various national healthcare systems, and the United States has been among them. For this reason, health care needs to involve all resources to stop the spread of the virus and avoid its fatal consequences. Pharmacists are one of the most important elements of this system as they provide funds for the treatment and prevention of diseases on which the destiny of a person depends. Moreover, creating the vaccine needed to end the pandemic is also a challenge for the pharmaceutical industry. Namely, Aruru et al. (2020) point to the lack of efficacy of the current strategies as the tools for promoting interdisciplinary work: “The joint policy recommendations by pharmacy organizations calls for the ease of operation barriers, including changing workforce and workflow issues to enable effective pharmacist engagement during COVID-19 response” (p. 6). Nonetheless, the problem at hand remains a challenge for a range of pharmacists, leading to the aggravation of key public health issues.
However, the authors of the article demonstrate that the role of pharmacists in the healthcare system often remains underestimated, which leads to flaws in the process of their integration into the system. Nevertheless, at critical and crisis moments the role of this integration grows and intensifies. Therefore, the study of past practices and documents promoting the integration of pharmacists and recognition of their role in healthcare is a logical and useful step to identify the main lacks of this process and the organization of the work of the pharmacist in general. Thus, making recommendations for optimizing the work of healthcare and pharmacists is necessary for more effective management in a pandemic situation.
In addition, this article is an example of a qualitative study based on the literature review but not on a survey of respondents, which is the most convenient for its assessment. The sequence of steps in the study and the structure of the article help to track the logic of the research and assess the presence of bias, errors, or imprecision, and the accuracy of the results. For this reason, this article is most suitable for its evaluation and annotation (Kanno & Kangas, 2014).
The authors should also be credited for the use of the PREP framework since it allows determining the criteria for the effective management of the cases of COVID-19 and, therefore, serves as the source of crucial support for the methodological aspect of the article. The PREP framework allows measuring the information gained for the analysis especially accurately and, thus, providing a more definitive answer to the research question.
The advantage of this article is also its structure as the authors consistently demonstrate the steps of analysis and study of various documents. However, the research question, the central question, and sub-questions are not clearly worded, and the authors highlight the main issue through research objectives. Creswell (2016) notes that the central issue of qualitative research is usually presented as a short and precise question, and the article has sub-questions that reveal the essence of the research in detail. However, Aruru et al. (2020) do not have such elements and form a central question through the objectives of the study. Therefore, this aspect is a minor drawback of a scientific article. At the same time, the consistency of the presentation of the facts and their categorization is a significant advantage of this article.
This structure also helps to track the logic of building arguments and reveal bias. Roulston and Shelton (2015) note that bias in qualitative research can occur unintentionally. For example, a researcher can compose questions in such a way as to obtain the desired result or to interpret the answer in a convenient way (Roulston & Shelton, 2015). However, a study of the literature leaves no room for distortion of questions, but the interpretation in an article by Aruru et al. (2020) is logical and consistent. In addition, all factors and aspects are listed in tables that are easy to analyze and find inconsistencies.
The validity of the article as the direct effect of the methodology used to implement the analysis is also worth addressing. Stemming directly from the research methods chosen, the external validity of the piece is very high since it allows projecting the outcomes of the analysis on other cases of similar nature (Anyon, 1981). Likewise, the internal validity reaches a significant level in the study at hand since the selected methods help to determine the cause-and-effect relationships between the focus areas identified in the course of the research and the successful management of COVID-19.
Similarly, the reliability of the information used in the research and the conclusions made by its authors is quite high. Since all of the data obtained for the analysis of the subject matter has been retrieved from highly trustworthy resources, including academic articles and databases, the reliability of the research outcomes can be defined as high (Ortlipp, 2008). Consequently, the overall impression that the article leaves is quite positive due to the vast opportunities that I provide for research and analysis.
The article leaves a rather positive impression with its focus on the strategies for reinforcing cross-disciplinary collaboration among pharmacists in order to address the COVID-19 issue. Arguably, several quantitative elements could have been introduced into the article in order to refine its results. For instance, when establishing the key areas represented in the article, the authors could have determined the extent to which each affects the management of COVID-19. Thus, the research would have gained more poignancy and depth. However, given the broad area that the specified assessment could have had to cover, it would be reasonable to relegate the specified issue to the future research, which may be a topic for a follow-up study. Overall, the article has left a crucial impact on the study of the problem of COVID-19 and the responses toward it. Due to the incorporation of reputable resources, meticulous choice of methodology, and elaborate selection of resources, as well as the instruments for evaluating the obtained information, the article can be considered as highly important for the target field.
References
Anyon, J. (1981). Social class and school knowledge. Curriculum Inquiry, 11(1), pp. 3-42.
Creswell, J. (2016). 30 essential skills for the qualitative researcher. Sage Publications.
Kanno, Y., & Kangas, S. E. (2014). “I’m not going to be, like, for the AP” English language learners’ limited access to advanced college-preparatory courses in high school. American Educational Research Journal, 51(5), pp. 848-878.
Ortlipp, M. (2008). Keeping and using reflective journals in the qualitative research process. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), pp. 695-705.
Roulston, K., & Shelton, S. A. (2015). Reconceptualizing bias in teaching qualitative research methods. Qualitative Inquiry, 21(4), 332–342. Web.