Background: Qualitative methods are essential for providing an in-depth understanding of "why" and "how" evidence-based interventions are successfully implemented-a key area of implementation science (IS) research. A systematic synthesis of the applications of qualitative methods is critical for understanding how qualitative methods have been used to date and identifying areas of innovation and optimization. This scoping review explores which qualitative data collection and analytic methods are used in IS research, what and how frameworks and theories are leveraged using qualitative methods, and which implementation issues are explored with qualitative implementation research.
Method: We conducted a systematic scoping review of articles in MEDLINE and Embase using qualitative methods in IS health research. We systematically extracted information including study design, data collection method(s), analytic method(s), implementation outcomes, and other domains.
Results: Our search yielded a final dataset of 867 articles from 76 countries. Qualitative study designs were predominantly single elicitation (67.7%) and longitudinal (20.3%). In-depth interviews were the most common data collection method (84.3%), followed by focus group discussions (FGDs) (34.5%), and nearly 25% used both. Sample sizes were, on average, 40 in-depth interviews (range: 1-1,131) and nine FGDs (range: 1-46). The most common analytic approaches were thematic analysis (45.3%) and content analysis (18.5%) with substantial variation in analytic conceptualization. Nearly one-quarter (23.2%) of articles used one or more TMF to conceptualize the study, and less than half (40.9%) of articles used a TMF to guide both data collection and analysis.
Conclusions: We highlight variation in how qualitative methods were used, as well as detailed examples of data collection and analysis descriptions. By reviewing how qualitative methods have been used in well-described and innovative ways, and identifying important gaps, we highlight opportunities for strengthening their use to optimize IS research.
Registration: The protocol can be found 10.11124/JBIES-20-00120.
Keywords: implementation science; qualitative methods; scoping review.
How Do Researchers Use Qualitative Methods to Study Implementation? A Review of the Literature Qualitative methods are useful in implementation science (IS) research because they help us understand why and how efforts to deliver evidence-based interventions succeed or fail. Knowing how qualitative methods have been used in past IS research is important for two main reasons. First, it can give researchers ideas about different qualitative methods they could use and help them choose the ones that may be most useful and appropriate for their studies. Second, it can highlight new ways qualitative methods are being used and identify important gaps. We reviewed 867 articles that used qualitative methods in IS research. Most used a mixed methods approach that included both quantitative and qualitative methods. The most common ways researchers collected qualitative data were through interviews and focus group discussions at one point in time. Sample sizes varied widely across studies, and researchers often did not explain why they chose certain sampling techniques. There was also wide variation in how the same data analysis method was described and why it was chosen. Finally, we point out ways to improve qualitative methods for future IS research.
© The Author(s) 2025.