You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Correspondence
Comment on ‘Ethnography asa methodological descriptor:the editors reply’
  1. Anne Sales,
  2. Theodore J Iwashyna
  1. Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Anne Sales, 300 N. Ingalls Street, Room 1161-I, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5403, USA;salesann{at}umich.edu

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005385

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    We appreciated the thoughtful commentary by Dixon-Woods and Shojania1 in response to emerging issues around methods and scholarship, particularly those using qualitative methods. Dixon-Woods and Shojania make important points in this commentary, but there are two issues with which we are concerned.

    Most importantly, we are concerned about both ends of a continuum in using ‘quick’ approaches that draw on the rich traditions of ethnography. On one side, the pressure to learn methods quickly and adapt them for rapid use can lead to loss of richness, dumbing down the …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles