Evidence in Orthodontics related to qualitative research.

Anderson Barbosa De Almeida,Isabel Cristina Gonçalves Leite,Girlene Alves Da Silva

doi:10.1590/2177-6709.23.4.064-071.oar

Anderson Barbosa De Almeida, Isabel Cristina Gonçalves Leite + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.23.4.064-071.oar

Copy DOI

Abstract

ABSTRACTIntroduction: Research in Orthodontics has historically followed the positivist model based on the direct relationship of cause and effect between diseases and their specific etiological factors. Despite the objectivity and the great potential of statistical procedures, quantitative methods have progressively been sharing space with other models that can encompass the multiplicity of factors that affect the health-disease process, which until such time was reduced to its biological dimension. Objectives: This study aims, through an integrative review, to identify orthodontics articles published over a 10-year period that have used, exclusively or not, some method of qualitative research, and analyze the main aspects of their content. Methods: A survey was performed on Pubmed, Medline, Scopus, and Lilacs databases from 2007 to 2016 with a focus on the applicability of the qualitative methodology in orthodontic research. Results: The 27 articles selected showed a trend to increase in publications, with the most recent four years concentrating almost 60% of them. Most studies were from Europe, particularly the UK, and the more frequent study objectives were related to the perception of people about the reasons for orthodontic treatment, about the aesthetic and psychosocial impact of malocclusion or orthodontic treatment, and the implications of these factors for their quality of life. Conclusions: Because of its potential to explore behaviours and socio-cultural attitudes sustained in subjectivity, qualitative research offers new possibilities for orthodontic studies and can be used in an exclusive or complementary way in relation to quantitative methods.

Highlights

Research in orthodontics has historically followed the positivist model based on the direct relationship of cause and effect between diseases and their specific etiological factors that can cause structural and physiological changes in the human body
Despite the objectivity and the great potential of statistical procedures, quantitative methods have been progressively sharing space with other models, due mainly to the former’s inability to encompass the multiplicity of factors that affect the health-disease process, which until that time was reduced to its biological dimension.[3,4,5]
After an assessment of systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials, O’Brien[9] states that the results of orthodontic research are confined to values and differences that are much more relevant for orthodontists than for their patients, which prompts the speculation that the planning of actions mediated by eminently quantitative data in the evaluations of the health-disease process may not meet the needs of the individuals involved

Summary

Introduction

Research in Orthodontics has historically followed the positivist model based on the direct relationship of cause and effect between diseases and their specific etiological factors. Despite the objectivity and the great potential of statistical procedures, quantitative methods have progressively been sharing space with other models that can encompass the multiplicity of factors that affect the health-disease process, which until such time was reduced to its biological dimension. Research in orthodontics has historically followed the positivist model based on the direct relationship of cause and effect between diseases and their specific etiological factors that can cause structural and physiological changes in the human body Such thinking has fostered a conception of scientific rigor for quantitative research so great that it became hegemonic in the specialty.[1,2]. Despite the objectivity and the great potential of statistical procedures, quantitative methods have been progressively sharing space with other models, due mainly to the former’s inability to encompass the multiplicity of factors that affect the health-disease process, which until that time was reduced to its biological dimension.[3,4,5]. In pointing out the limits of the quantitative approach, the author indicates the need for closer ties with other research approaches that can comprehend the multifaceted phenomenon of the health-disease process

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion