Category: Events

Building Community: BMERG Journal Club, Cultural Competency

Posted on by sarah.allsop

Adding to our BMERG Journal Club series, this month Dr Claire Hudson reflects on the discussion from our January journal club focussing on Cultural Competency.

Liu, J., K. Miles, and S. Li, Cultural competence education for undergraduate medical students: An ethnographic study. Frontiers in Education, 2022. 7. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2022.980633/full

This paper was chosen by my colleague, Assoc. Prof Liang-Fong Wong, who has a combined interest in cultural competency and medical education, being Year 4 co-lead for our undergraduate MBChB programme and Associate Pro Vice-Chancellor for Internationalisation.  Both Liang and I are keen to develop our qualitative research skills, and at first glance, this paper seemed like an excellent example of a qualitative study.

What is ‘Cultural Competency’?

Liu et al suggest culturally competent healthcare professionals should “communicate effectively and care for patients from diverse social and cultural backgrounds, and to recognize and appropriately address racial, cultural, gender and other sociocultural relevant biases in healthcare delivery”; others have defined attributes of culture competency including “cultural awareness, cultural knowledge, cultural skill, cultural sensitivity, cultural interaction, and cultural understanding”. These concepts were explained effectively at the start of the paper; I felt the authors provided me with context for my subsequent reading.

What was the research?

The authors perceived that teaching of cultural competency is inconsistent across medical schools, and there is a paucity of evidence for how effective the teaching is, and how students actually develop their cultural competency throughout their training. They aimed to describe students’ experiences of learning and developing cultural competency, using an ethnographic approach. They carried out student observations, interviews and focus groups; recruiting participants from a central London medical school.

What were the findings?

There is a wealth of qualitative data and discussion presented in the paper, so perhaps the authors could summarise their overall findings in a clearer way. They suggest that students develop cultural competency in stages; in the pre-clinical years they have formal teaching opportunities, and as their clinical exposure increases, the culture content becomes embedded and derived from other learning experiences, including intercalation and placements.  They highlight the importance of learning from patients’ lived experiences, from peers and from other (non-medical) student communities.

What did we think?

  • Clear descriptions: I come from a quantitative, scientific background, therefore I find reading qualitative papers quite challenging; the terminology used is noticeably different and somewhat out of my ‘comfort zone’! Having said that, the authors very clearly explained the basis of ethnography and reflexivity, which really helped us understand the rationale for them adopting these approaches. Data collection and analysis were explained in detail which reassured us that these were robust and valid. However, thorough descriptions mean a long paper; and it could be more concise in places.
  • Awareness of limitations: A strength of this research was the authors’ transparency about some of its limitations. For example, they acknowledged a potential bias in participant recruitment due to the main author’s own cultural background, but described ways to mitigate this. We found it really interesting that the authors observed different dynamics in the interviews and focus groups depending on the facilitator. In those conducted by a PhD student, a rapport was built such that the students were relaxed and open with their communication, allowing them to be critical about the cultural competency teaching they had received. Conversely, in those conducted by a medical school academic, students were more reserved and tended to be positive about the teaching, highlighting an obvious teacher-student power dynamic. Importantly, this was acknowledged, and adjustments were made. Our biggest take-home message: Carefully consider who facilitates interviews and focus groups so there are no conflicts of interest, and trust is fostered between participants and researchers. Otherwise, students may just tell you what you want to hear!
  • Evaluation to recommendations: We also remarked that the authors have been clever in the way they present this study for publication. Essentially, they have carried out an internal evaluation of cultural competency teaching in their own medical school, but they have externalised this by making a series of recommendations. They benefit from a very diverse student population, and showcase some really good practice in cultural competency teaching which could be adopted by medical schools.

Overall reflections

Reading this paper made us reflect on non-clinical teaching on other programmes; it is important to remember that diverse student populations increase cultural awareness in all settings. Widening participation schemes and overseas students are important for this. During group work, I try to make the groups as diverse as possible, and I believe this is a positive experience.

The study highlighted different levels of engagement from students with cultural competency teaching, some thought it was ‘pointless’ as they were already culturally competent, or they thought the skills were ‘soft’ and would rather be learning facts, other found it really valuable. This is familiar when teaching other skills in other disciplines; the constant battle getting ‘buy-in’ from students, highlighting the need to always explain ‘Why’ certain teaching is important.

This study is a good showcase for qualitative research, and I made a mental note to refer back to this paper when developing my own qualitative research in the future; which must be a good sign!

Read our previous Journal club review on Self-regulated learning here: https://bmerg.blogs.bristol.ac.uk/2023/11/24/journal_club_publication_review1/

Event News: TICC GW4: The Inaugural CTF Conference

Posted on by sarah.allsop
Dr Ed Luff
Dr Sam Chumbley

In this blog Dr Sam Chumbley and Dr Ed Luff invite you to The Inaugural CTF Conference: TICC GW4, hosted by the University of Bristol in collaboration with BMERG.

TICC GW4 provides an opportunity to see and present the valued work of Clinical Teaching Fellows (CTFs) from across the GW4 Alliance Medical Schools of Bristol, Cardiff, and Exeter. Building on the successes of last year’s Inaugural CTF Conference at the University of Bristol, which brought together CTFs from Bristol Medical School’s regional academies, we have expanded this year’s meeting, to invite presenters from the GW4 Alliance Medical Schools, Bristol, Cardiff, and Exeter.

One of the highlights of this year’s expanded interinstitutional conference will be a keynote from Dr Jo Hartland, Senior Lecturer and Deputy Education Director at Bristol Medical School. They will be presenting an account of their work in the field of Equality, Diversity and Inclusion.

There will also be presentation options for CTFs from the GW4 Alliance, in a variety of formats, including Research, Innovation and Opinion Pieces. Authors can choose to submit abstracts for consideration as a Showcase presentation (20 minutes), Oral presentation (10 minutes), Poster presentation (3 minutes) or for display as an e-Poster, which requires no presentation on the day. Opinion Pieces can also be considered for an Open Forum (30-minute) platform of discussion. There will also be a variety of workshops run on the day, to help develop delegates’ research and clinical academic skills.

All those involved in the teaching or support of medical students, be that clinical, academic, or administrative, are welcome to attend the conference. However, presentations will only be open to Clinical Teaching Fellows from the GW4 Alliance Medical Schools.

Registration is free and lunch will be provided. TICC GW4 will be held in Bristol on the 5th of April 2024. Further details will be sent following registration.

To register for the conference or to submit your abstract for consideration for presentation at the conference, please follow this link: TICC GW4 Registration

Registration will close nearer to the conference date.

The deadline for submission of abstracts is 12:00 on Friday 8th March 2024.

For further information visit https://bmerg.blogs.bristol.ac.uk/ticc-gw4/ or for queries please contact med-leadctf@bristol.ac.uk

Building Community: Enhancing the International Student Experience

Posted on by sarah.allsop

In this blog, Dr Liang-Fong Wong shares some key insights into how we foster an inclusive environment for international students within our university academic systems and culture.

As 2023 drew to a close, I attended a ‘Show, Tell and Talk’ workshop run by the Bristol Institute of Learning and Teaching (BILT) on International Student Experience.

This is an area of work that is close to my heart – being an international student at Bristol myself many moons ago, my international roles, and serendipitously, it was being organised by my netball teammate Catriona Johnson, from the Centre for Academic Language and Development (CALD).

L-R: Assoc Prof Liang-Fong Wong, Dr Fiona Holmes, and Dr Claire Hudson at BILT International Student Experience workshop, 2023.

Catriona and I had previously shared many courtside and car conversations about her project work on academic language and literacy, but have never interacted within our work capacities. I was delighted to turn up on the day to find fellow BMERG members Fiona Holmes and Claire Hudson there as well!

International staff and students are an important community at our institution: they are invaluable to the diversity of our campuses, adding richness and vibrancy to our learning environments and making us all much better global citizens for now and the future. There is so much that we can learn from each other across different cultures.

During the session, we were given an overview of the numerous BILT-funded projects across the university that explore themes such as increasing inclusivity in the international classroom, decolonising curricula and developing sense and belonging.

Fiona Hartley (BILT/CALD) presented the ‘3 shocks’ that international students can experience:

  • Pedagogical (knowing what to expect academically)
  • Language (how to express oneself academically)
  • Cultural (feeling a sense of belonging and community in Bristol)

What was really interesting was the observation that some of these shocks may not be unique to international students, and indeed may be familiar to others in the wider student population, particularly first-year students.

We discussed in small groups how different schools use effective interventions and ways to enhance teaching and learning experience within and outside of the classroom. There were so many great examples, such as:

  • optional induction modules
  • allocating groups and facilitating group work sensitively
  • academic integrity training
  • peer-assisted support sessions
  • promoting opportunities through the Global Lounge, Bristol Voices and Bristol Connects initiatives

Through sharing experiences across the whole university and across disciplines, it gave us ideas on how we can implement some of these strategies in our own practices.

All in all, I really enjoyed the session; it was such an enriching discussion and I got to know many people outside of the medical school.

I am very much looking forward to going to more of these workshops in 2024 and if you, like me, would like to participate here is the events link to the BILT website: Events | Bristol Institute For Learning and Teaching | University of Bristol

More about this blog author:

Dr Liang-Fong Wong is one of the University of Bristol’s Associate Pro-Vice Chancellors for Internationalisation as well as working as an Associate Professor in regenerative medicine. She also works with the undergraduate students as the Year 4 co-lead for the medical programme and is one of the inaugural members of the BMERG committee.

Building Community: In conversation with Dr Megan Brown – Beyond the barriers: embracing potential in medical education research

Posted on by sarah.allsop

For the first in our new ‘In conversation with‘ Series*, our BMERG co-chair Dr Sarah Allsop invited Dr Megan Brown to join BMERG for an online webinar to share her experience as an educator. Here we share some of the topics from the discussion and Megan’s top tips for embracing potential in medical education research.

We started the conversation talking about career journeys. Megan shared her own journey into Medical Education, starting in a clinical role as a doctor, and moving through a PGCert in Medical Education and then a PhD, before continuing on to research associate roles. She described her journey as feeling initially ‘pick and mix’ or serendipitous, a sense that many of us in the medical education discipline have come to know and feel, but that actually every experience has things we can take away, things we can learn, and can ultimately shape who we are and what we do.

She talked of how the different aspects of her work, whether on identity, equality or creativity, have all come together to create an interesting portfolio of work about how we look at practices within medical education, and how this translates to workforce issues like wellbeing and staff retention.

Top Tip: Consider not only your current research project, but the body or programme of research that you are doing and how this fits together. All of us need to consider what our story is: what matters to us, what impact we want to have and ultimately what we want to be known for.

Megan also talked about the way in which networking, both in person and social media has been influential in her making connections. Social media can be a really helpful way to get exposure both to others in the discipline and exposure for your own work, but the drawback is it takes time and energy.

The landscape in social media is also changing and is not for everyone. Megan encouraged us that whilst networking is important and can help to make connections that open doors, this can be done in a number of different ways, via emails, list servers, meetings and conferences to name just a few.

She also impressed on us not to get tied up in hierarchy. It is really important to connect with your peers in the discipline; those much further ahead may be really interesting to talk to, but these conversations may not yield collaborations.

Top Tip: Connect with those peers who show similar interests, and ambition to create impact in the same area as you. We are stronger when we work together.

We then talked about publishing and if Megan had any advice for those wanting to publish their work. She started with the advice to think about impact and outputs early on the the research process. All research is done to try to solve a problem, uncover truths or to empower change for the better, and so will usually have an important audience. By thinking about who might want or need to know about your results in order to influence the change you want to see, you can think about which journal, book or other medium is the best place for your work. We also talked a little about the publishing ‘game’ and the inevitable rejection that comes with trying to disseminate our work, and not to get put off by this.

Top Tip: Think broadly about how and where to disseminate your work and how to make it translatable to others. It’s not just empirical research that can be shared through publication, but commentaries, innovations, evaluation and methods, so make sure to consider carefully the best match for your work.

Finally we talked a little about role models, and Megan shared that whilst she thinks her mentors have been really important for supporting her in her career goals, she does not really have specific role models. She explained that as she is not trying to replicate another individual, she takes inspiration from wide sources, both people and environments, and through her own creativity. This has inspired her to use creative methods within her research and led to a project using poetic enquiry, “Thoughts that breathe, and words that burn: poetic inquiry within health professions education“.

Top Tip: Take inspiration from everywhere, and don’t be afraid to try new things and look for ideas outside medical education to drive new and exciting innovation.

Part of Megan’s work is being involved with the NIHR Incubator for Clinical Education Research. The Incubator’s mission is support and promote careers in clinical education research and build a multi-professional community of practice in this space, including offering free events for educators.

The next free online event and discussion, “Getting Started In … coming up with an idea and writing a research question” will be held 12.45-1.45pm Wednesday December 20th, 2023. You can sign up for this webinar and others here.

Guest Speaker Biography

Dr Megan Brown (she/her) is a Senior Research Associate in Medical Education at Newcastle University, Director of Communications and Social Media at ASME, Co-chair for Dissemination at the NIHR Incubator for Clinical Education Research, and Vice-chair of the MedEd Collaborative. Megan trained as a doctor but made the transition to full-time academic practice. Megan’s research focuses on translating and applying educational theory to practice; workforce issues within the NHS; creative approaches to research; and EDI, particularly relating to improving the support and experiences of disabled healthcare professionals, as Megan is a disabled, and neurodivergent academic herself.

* BMERG ‘In conversation with’ Series. This series of events will bring some amazing speakers to speak and share their experiences in medical education and research. Please note some sessions are only accessible to University of Bristol Staff and Students.

Publishing in Medical Education: Writing for Publication – Getting Started

Posted on by sarah.allsop

Building on our previous BMERG Publishing in Medical Education Blogs, in this post Dr Sally Dowling talks about the exciting, but often challenging process of getting started with writing for publication, and the things that are important to do before you start writing.

Sally is a Lecturer at Bristol Medical School, working both for the Teaching and Learning for Health Professionals programme and the MSc Reproduction and Development (Co-Director). She also runs a series of writing for publication workshops for the Faculty of Health Sciences at the University of Bristol.

Photo by Thought Catalog on Unsplash

Many of us have pieces of work that we’d like to publish. This might be an idea from your area of expertise, a completed audit or evaluation, an innovation from your medical education practice, the outcomes of a study/research project/dissertation – or maybe an opinion piece, commentary or book review. Whatever this might be, there are several things that are important to do before you start writing. Many of these are in the form of questions you might need to ask yourself, or things that you might need to find out. It’s a good idea to do this type of preparation before you actually start to write as this will really increase the chance of your paper being sent for review.

So, how do you get started?

Ask yourself:

  • What am I trying to communicate – what is my aim?
  • What writing style/who is my audience?
  • Why is my message important/relevant?
  • What type of article do I want to write?

When you are clear about what you want to do, there is still more research needed before you start writing.

Should you write with others – or are you planning to write alone?

It depends! Have you undertaken the work with others (including as part of a doctoral or masters project)? Understanding publication ethics is important, as is thinking about authorship (see www.icmje.org/). Things to consider include what contribution each author has made to the manuscript, remembering that authors are accountable for the rigour, accuracy and integrity of the content – and don’t forget to agree the author order from the beginning! Usually these issues can be talked through straightforwardly (after all, you have probably been working together for a while) but they can sometimes be tricky to resolve.

Where do you want to publish your work?

Now you can start to think about where you would like to submit, and how that influences what and how you write it. Sarah Allsop covered some of this in her BMERG blog Publishing in Medical Education: Matching.  Explore journal websites and look at author guidelines – these will very specifically tell you about word length, abstract format, general formatting, including use of sub-headings, referencing style (and, sometimes, number permitted), the layout for tables/graphs, digital artwork etc (and how many you can include). It’s always much easier to write your article as the journal want to see it, rather than retrospectively make it fit to the guidelines.

Have you fully informed yourself about your target journal?

It’s also a good idea to read some papers published by your chosen journal, as well as looking at who is on the editorial board (do you know their work? Are they from a range of countries?). Is the potential journal open to a range of methodologies. Does it have an Impact Factor (a mark of quality, international standing)? Is this important to you? (or your department!). Can you find out what the time lag is between acceptance and publication – and is this important to you? Does the journal require an Article Processing Charge in order to publish your work, or is this optional? Yes, this is a lot of questions, but checking out all of these things before you start is really worthwhile and highly recommended.

Taking the time to work through this process at the start of your writing journey may seem onerous at first, but in the long term it not only helps your writing process, but it might just improve your chances of publishing where you want in the long term.

If you’d like to have an opportunity to explore these issues more, consider coming to one of the Medical Education Research Writing for Publication and Conference workshop sessions (contact Sally Dowling or see full programme here).

Hot Topics: BMERG launches a new page for Abstract Calls!

Posted on by sarah.allsop
Sarah Allsop

Following on from our recent BMERG blog on Building Community: Attending, presenting and networking at Conferences we are launching a new page in the BMERG site to highlight abstract calls as they are released from Medical Education Associations. This list will build throughout the year and aims to support researchers to find out more easily about the timings of annual conferences and events.

Take a look by clicking on the “Abstract Calls!” in the top menu or clicking on the link below:

Access our Abstract Calls List here

If you know of either a medical education and research event or an event with a broader scope that may be of interest to the BMERG audience, let us know in the comments below:

An ABCDE to Getting Started with Medical Education Research

Posted on by sarah.allsop
Sarah Allsop

In this blog Sarah Allsop, a Senior Lecturer at Bristol Medical School, shares a short 5-point top tip guide to getting started in medical education research.

Photo by David Iskander on Unsplash

It was great today to be able to extend a warm welcome to the new intake of Clinical Teaching Fellows (CTFs) working across the NHS Trusts linked to the University of Bristol Medical School, and introduce them to the work of BMERG.

CTFs are not only fantastic teachers and innovators, but also undertake some amazing medical education research projects. Bristol’s recent posters and oral presentations at both AoME and ASME is testament to this, with AMEE still to come at the end of August.

For new CTFs, and in fact anyone starting out undertaking research projects in education, this may be a new task and one which can seem quite daunting. Developing skills in educational research is a journey.

Here is a short 5-point ABCDE guide of top tips for getting started in Education Research – a place to start when you are not sure where to start.

A is for Aim: What are you trying to achieve? What problem are you trying to solve? What is the VALUE of your project? All research projects should start with an aim. Having a clear aim will then help to guide your next steps, study design and methods.

B is for Blueprint: How are you going to blueprint / plan your study? What research paradigm will you use? How will you use educational THEORY to aid the design of your project? What methodology aligns with your research question(s)? What do you need to prepare for your ethical review? Planning your project carefully and considering the alignment of the different elements of your study will ultimately lead to a better quality research project.

C is for Collaborate: Can you work collaboratively to build a stronger, more powerful project? Are there already projects in motion that you can join or build on? How can you work and support each other better? What interdisciplinary angles might be possible? We are stronger together. Talk to your peers and seniors about research projects. You may have ideas of your own that you wish to progress and that is fine, but if these align with the ideas of others, or you can build on previous studies, or try innovations across multiple sites or cohorts, this will improve the POWER and transferability of your work.

D is for Disseminate: How would you like to present or publish your work? Do you want to attend an international medical education or discipline specific conference or publish in a peer-reviewed journal? Would you like to be able to showcase your work across the wider local medical school community? One of the key principle aims of all research is to further knowledge and this means that we need to share our findings. Think about your REACH and influence – where, when and how you might like to share your educational research project results.

E is for Endpoint: What is the potential IMPACT of your study? Who might benefit from learning about your results? What are your personal goals? It may sound counter-intuitive to think about the end-point at the start of your journey, but this will help you to plan and develop a timeline. You will always have finite time to work on a particular project and so understanding your goals and being mindful about what is possible will help you to create the deadlines you need to keep your project on track.

Over the coming months BMERG will be sharing more top tips on undertaking educational research, as well as offering events such as journal clubs, writing groups and more. Subscribe to the blog to get all the latest BMERG news direct to your inbox.

Read more about Bristol conference work this summer at AoME 2023 and ASME 2023

BMERG News: Bristol Clinical Teaching Fellows based at Gloucester Academy win the ASME oral TEL SIG ASM Communications Prize 2023

Posted on by sarah.allsop

BMERG is really pleased and proud to share that Bristol’s Alice Middleton, Carys Gilbert, Philippa Dodd & Isabel Rimmer, from our Gloucester Academy at Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Trust have been awarded the Technology Enhanced Learning Special Interest Group Annual Scholarship Meeting Oral Presentation Prize for their presentation,

“Low-Tech, High-Yield; the utility of virtual patients using simple presentation software“

A massive congratulations to the team on their presentation and work. You can read their winning abstract below and read more at: www.asme.org.uk/awards/tel-asm-prize-2023/#winners

TEL-AS-COMMS-PRIZE-2023-ORAL-WINNER

Read Ed Luffs Blog and Report on the ASME Scholarship Meeting here.

Hot Topics: Researcher skills – 5 key learning points about Reflexive Thematic Analysis

Posted on by sarah.allsop

This blog is written for BMERG by one of our committee members Dr Grace Pearson. Grace is Bristol Medical School graduate and a current Clinical Research Fellow in Population Health Sciences. Her research interests are in undergraduate medical education, specifically curriculum development and evaluation and geriatrics education.  

Grace shares her experience and tips after attending a workshop hosted by BMERG and the School of Policy Studies on ‘Reflexive Thematic Analysis’ from the expert Qualitative researcher, Professor Virginia Braun from the University of Auckland. 

Image of a galaxy Photo by Bryan Goff on Unsplash
Image of buckets Photo by Sixteen Miles Out on Unsplash

At medical school, future doctors are taught to detect patterns in history and examination to reach a diagnosis. Moving into medical research, this scientific pattern-recognition continues in quantitative data analysis and interpretation. As a result, approaching mixed methods studies or pure qualitative research can be daunting for those of us in medical and other scientific fields – it certainly was for me.  

There are several core aspects of qualitative data analysis that I’ve never truly got to grips with, despite attending multiple training courses… Therefore, getting the chance to learn directly from a world-leading expert was an opportunity not to be missed.  

I went into this workshop wanting to learn how to analyse or ‘code’ my data and develop my themes. I came away with a much wider appreciation of the importance of exploring context, embracing subjectivity, finding latent meaning, and conceptualising what Prof Braun called ‘galaxy’ themes rather than ‘buckets’. Let me explain a bit more.  

When we first look at qualitative data during analysis, certain things can jump out at us as topics. We may think these may start to look like our themes, but if we are not careful, they can end up looking like our original questions and, because everything we connect to a particular topic ends up together ‘in a bucket’ so to speak, may have lots of conflicting ideas within them.  

Conversely, true themes are more like a galaxy with a clear core, a ‘central organizing concept’ holding together all the ideas which although may be different, just like stars and planets are in a galaxy, they remain inherently linked. 

Here are my 5 key learning points from Professor Braun’s fantastic reflexive thematic analysis (RTA) workshop, which I hope might help others to approach their own qualitative data analysis in a reassuringly robust way:  

  • Scientifically Descriptive vs Artfully Interpretive analysis: Descriptive describes and summarises the data in an ‘experiential’ or ‘realist’ manner. Interpretive tells a story, locating the data within a wider context and presents an argument in a ‘critical’ or ‘constructionist’ way. Approaches to thematic analysis (TA), range from ‘scientifically descriptive’ deductive methods such as coding reliability, to ‘artfully interpretive’ inductive methods such as reflexive TA. 
  • Small q vs Big Q: Descriptive analysis suits ‘Small q’ research questions that seek to explore or describe peoples’ experiences, understandings, or perceptions – their ‘individual reality’. Interpretive analysis suits ‘Big Q’ research questions that seek to explore the ‘wider context’, for instance influencing factors, representations, and constructions.  
  • Context and Subjectivity: Analysis occurs in the intersecting space between the researcher(s), the data, and the research question. Subjectivity is present in all 3, as all are influenced by sociocultural, disciplinary, and scholarly context – as a result, analysis is situated in context, which must be clearly communicated.  
  • Coding: codes are ‘units of analytic interest’, the smallest unit of analysis capturing a single analytic idea or facet. These can be semantic (explicit) or latent (implicit) – descriptive analysis generally uses more semantic codes, whilst interpretive analysis uses both. Codes are not ontologically ‘real’, they exist only for the researcher(s) to foster engagement with the data – they need to capture the meaning of the data along with the researchers’ interpretation, orientated towards answering the research question.   
  • Themes: a theme is a construction that captures shared or repeated meaning in the data around a ‘central organising concept’. Themes are conceptual, therefore semantic-level data may seem disparate, but it is unified by latent meaning representing diverse manifestations of the core concept (like a galaxy).  Themes sit in the analytic narrative – they must tell a story of how the data is meaningful and answers the research question.   

Some examples of recommended resources for getting started using reflexive thematic analysis 

  • https://www.thematicanalysis.net/  
  • Braun, V, & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. SAGE. 
  • Braun, V, & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE. 
  • Braun, V, & Clarke, V. (2021). Can I use TA? Should I use TA? Should I not use TA? Comparing reflexive thematic analysis and other pattern-based qualitative analytic approaches. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 21(1), 37-47. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/capr.12360 
  • Braun, V, & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328-352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238 

More about Professor Braun https://profiles.auckland.ac.nz/v-braun

Virginia “Ginny” Braun is a New Zealand psychology academic specialising critical psychology of health and gender. She is internationally recognised for expertise in qualitative methodologies, and particularly the now widely utilised method of (reflexive) thematic analysis – developed in collaboration with Victoria Clarke (UWE).