Gittus, M. orcid.org/0000-0002-8406-2027, Sutton, A., Lagojda, L. orcid.org/0000-0001-9793-3672 et al. (2 more authors) (2026) Which medical subspecialties use qualitative research? A bibliometric analysis. BMJ Open, 16 (1). e109320. ISSN: 2044-6055
Abstract
Objectives: Qualitative research addresses ‘how’ and ‘why’ questions in healthcare. It captures the complexity of clinical practice by providing insights into experiences, behaviours and context often missed by quantitative methods. The objective of this review was to explore the volume, trends and adherence to reporting standards in qualitative research across hospital-based medical subspecialties.
Design: Longitudinal bibliometric review.
Setting and participants: Ovid Medline, Embase and Emcare were searched for qualitative research published between 2000 and 2024 in 12 medical subspecialties. For each subspecialty, the number and percentage of qualitative publications was identified. Adherence to reporting standards was assessed in a random sample of publications covering all subspecialties.
Results: Between 2000 and 2024, 715 471 qualitative research studies were published across 12 medical subspecialties, representing 1.36% of all studies (52 620 042). Neurology and oncology had the highest number of qualitative studies (116 835 and 106 360). Although infectious diseases contributed a lower absolute number of qualitative studies (59 947), they had the highest proportion relative to all studies (4.07%). Conversely, nephrology and haematology exhibited the lowest number of qualitative studies (14 510 and 29 198) and smallest proportions (0.90% and 0.81%). Overall, the annual proportion of qualitative research increased from 0.64% (6052/945 008) in 2000 to 1.95% (56 909/2 919 825) in 2024. However, the relative positions remained largely stable over time.
Adherence to reporting standards was generally good, particularly in relation to methodological coherence. However, there was under-reporting of positionality (where researchers consider how their identity and standpoint may influence the research process) and reflexivity (where researchers critically reflect on how their assumptions and decisions shape the study).
Conclusions: Qualitative research is under-represented in medical subspecialties but has increased steadily over time, with notable variation in adoption between subspecialties. While overall adherence to reporting standards is good, greater attention to positionality and reflexivity is needed to enhance transparency and rigour.
Metadata
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Authors/Creators: |
|
| Copyright, Publisher and Additional Information: | © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2026. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ Group. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
| Dates: |
|
| Institution: | The University of Sheffield |
| Academic Units: | The University of Sheffield > Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health (Sheffield) > School of Medicine and Population Health |
| Date Deposited: | 16 Jan 2026 10:30 |
| Last Modified: | 16 Jan 2026 10:30 |
| Status: | Published |
| Publisher: | BMJ |
| Refereed: | Yes |
| Identification Number: | 10.1136/bmjopen-2025-109320 |
| Open Archives Initiative ID (OAI ID): | oai:eprints.whiterose.ac.uk:236611 |
Download
Filename: e109320.full.pdf
Licence: CC-BY-NC 4.0

CORE (COnnecting REpositories)
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)