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.

Longitudinal bibliometric review.

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.

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).

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.

Researchers are increasingly using workshops within health research, particularly in the context of developing complex interventions. The status of workshops within health research is not clear. Are workshops a research method or a form of stakeholder involvement akin to patient and public involvement? Do they require ethics approval? How are data collected and analysed? How should the results be published – if at all?

Reflection on the methodological literature.

Researchers can frame workshops as a qualitative research method if they aim to generate new knowledge that is useful to stakeholders external to their research project and therefore aim to publish the findings of the workshops. In that context, ethics approval is required, with written informed consent taken from participants. Data collection can occur using a range of approaches including post-it notes, handwritten notes or audio or video recordings of discussions. Data can be analysed using a range of approaches including thematic or content analysis. Like any qualitative research, results can be published in a research article. A list of issues to consider and report when undertaking workshops as a research method is offered, based on methodological literature from a range of research fields. Alternatively, researchers can frame workshops as ‘stakeholder involvement in research’ if they aim to identify knowledge for use within their research project only. The product of these workshops might be characterised as a set of actions for the research team to take. Formal analysis will not be necessary—merely identification of actions—and reporting within publications may be similar to the reporting of patient and public involvement activity with a research project. Researchers may face grey areas when deciding which route to adopt. Team reflection and documenting the justification for the decision made may help to formulate appropriate decisions.