These interviews use social constructionist and phenomenological lenses to explore reflections on the observed supervision session.
Three themes emerged from the interviews: use partographs rarely and retrospectively; training does not support correct use of partographs; and partographs can be useful but are not feasible.
Follow-up interviews use a similar schedule but include additional questions to explore what has happened to participants following treatment, including changes over time in their opinions of the treatment, their interactions with healthcare professionals, and their health.
Reliability was aided by the full transcription of interviews, use of qualitative software that enabled tracking of the analysis, meetings to discuss and resolve coding differences, and the use of a structured approach (the Framework method) to analysis.
Authors adopted techniques from the constant comparative method, including line-by-line analysis of early interviews, use of subsequent interviews to test preliminary assumptions, comparison of codes and cases across the data set, and identification of deviant cases.
In order to facilitate deeper exploration of the known key themes and assumed barriers/facilitators to help-seeking, the interviews use probes designed to ensure rich data are collected.
