Going where other methods cannot: A systematic mapping review of 25 years of qualitative research in Otolaryngology

Objective: To map the use of qualitative methods within otolaryngology, providing examples and identifying gaps in the literature.

Design: Systematic mapping review of journal-based literature from 1990 to 2015 using Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and CENTRAL. Included studies were categorised according to clinical subspecialty, research aims and qualitative approach.

Results: Of 4,061 identified articles, 388 were deemed relevant to qualitative research in ENT. The number of qualitative publications has risen markedly over the last 25 years (r = 0.802), particularly since 2010. The most commonly used method was semi-structured interviews 62.1% (241/388). Head and neck cancer (41.8% (162/388)) and otology (40.2% (156/388)) publish more qualitative research than rhinology (7.0% (27/388)) and laryngology (6.7% (26/388)).

Conclusions: Qualitative research in otolaryngology has increased over time, but laryngology and rhinology remain under-represented. Most studies use interviews, underutilising the strengths of other qualitative methods. There is considerable scope for further application of qualitative methods in otolaryngology.