Skip to content

Reporting Formative Qualitative Research to Support the Development of Quantitative Preference Study Protocols and Corresponding Survey Instruments: Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)121-136
Number of pages16
Issue number1
Early online date16 Dec 2019
DateAccepted/In press - 20 Nov 2019
DateE-pub ahead of print - 16 Dec 2019
DatePublished (current) - 1 Feb 2020


Background: Formative qualitative research is foundational to the methodological development process of quantitative health preference research (HPR). Despite its ability to improve the validity of the quantitative evidence, formative qualitative research is underreported.

Objective: To improve the frequency and quality of reporting, we developed guidelines for reporting this type of research. The guidelines focus on formative qualitative research used to develop robust and acceptable quantitative study protocols and corresponding survey instruments in HPR.

Methods: In December 2018, a steering committee was formed as a means to accumulate the expertise of the HPR community on the reporting guidelines (21 members, seven countries, multiple settings, and disciplines). Using existing guidelines and examples, the committee constructed, revised, and refined the guidelines. The guidelines underwent beta-testing by three researchers and further revision to the guidelines were made based on their feedback as well as from comments from members of the International Academy of Health Preference Research (IAHPR) and the editorial board of The Patient.

Results: The guidelines have five components: introductory material (4 domains); methods (12); results/findings (2); discussion (2); and other (2). They are concordant with existing guidelines, published examples, beta testing results, and expert comments.

Conclusions: Publishing formative qualitative research is a necessary step towards strengthening the foundation of any quantitative study, enhancing the relevance of its preference evidence. The guidelines should aid researchers, reviewers and regulatory agencies as well as promote transparency within HPR more broadly.



  • Full-text PDF (accepted author manuscript)

    Rights statement: This is the author accepted manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via Springer NAture at Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.

    Accepted author manuscript, 535 KB, PDF document

    Embargo ends: 16/12/20

    Request copy


View research connections

Related faculties, schools or groups