Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests

Abstract

ObjectiveTo review empirical studies that assess saturation in qualitative research in order to identify sample sizes for saturation, strategies used to assess saturation, and guidance we can draw from these studies. MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of four databases to identify studies empirically assessing sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research, supplemented by searching citing articles and reference lists. ResultsWe identified 23 articles that used empirical data (n = 17) or statistical modeling (n = 6) to assess saturation. Studies using empirical data reached saturation within a narrow range of interviews (9–17) or focus group discussions (4–8), particularly those with relatively homogenous study populations and narrowly defined objectives. Most studies had a relatively homogenous study population and assessed code saturation; the few outliers (e.g., multi-country research, meta-themes, “code meaning” saturation) needed larger samples for saturation. ConclusionsDespite varied research topics and approaches to assessing saturation, studies converged on a relatively consistent sample size for saturation for commonly used qualitative research methods. However, these findings apply to certain types of studies (e.g., those with homogenous study populations). These results provide strong empirical guidance on effective sample sizes for qualitative research, which can be used in conjunction with the characteristics of individual studies to estimate an appropriate sample size prior to data collection. This synthesis also provides an important resource for researchers, academic journals, journal reviewers, ethical review boards, and funding agencies to facilitate greater transparency in justifying and reporting sample sizes in qualitative research. Future empirical research is needed to explore how various parameters affect sample sizes for saturation.