António Pedro Costa | Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP, v. 50, n. 6
Sobre:
“Peer review processes are a symbol of credibility and reliability for scientific journals. These publications depend on different types of evaluation: single-blind, double-blind, open, cascading and pre-publication and post-publication peer review, so as to ensure the quality of their publications. In the social sciences, the double-blind peer review is most commonly used, in which the reviewers do not know who the authors are, and vice-versa. However, do the paths defined vary in the review of qualitative articles? Articles that are grounded in qualitative data analysis use non numerical and unstructured data (texts, videos, images and audios). There are no standards as to how results must be presented. Nevertheless, “qualitative” articles are characterized by explanation of the analysis process, in which the authors describe how data were organized, whether the dimensions, categories, and subcategories were defined deductively or inductively, the definitions that reflect the theoretical framework, inferences to data, and the grounding and evidence for the articles. Essentially, they differ from quantitative articles in their methodological strand, considering that, in many points, their frontier is a very fine line or simply does not exist. (…)”
