research methodology question paper with case study

• Privacy Policy

Home » Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Table of Contents

A case study is a research method that involves an in-depth examination and analysis of a particular phenomenon or case, such as an individual, organization, community, event, or situation.

It is a qualitative research approach that aims to provide a detailed and comprehensive understanding of the case being studied. Case studies typically involve multiple sources of data, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts, which are analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, and grounded theory. The findings of a case study are often used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Types of Case Study

Types and Methods of Case Study are as follows:

Single-Case Study

A single-case study is an in-depth analysis of a single case. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand a specific phenomenon in detail.

For Example , A researcher might conduct a single-case study on a particular individual to understand their experiences with a particular health condition or a specific organization to explore their management practices. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a single-case study are often used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Multiple-Case Study

A multiple-case study involves the analysis of several cases that are similar in nature. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to identify similarities and differences between the cases.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a multiple-case study on several companies to explore the factors that contribute to their success or failure. The researcher collects data from each case, compares and contrasts the findings, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as comparative analysis or pattern-matching. The findings of a multiple-case study can be used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Exploratory Case Study

An exploratory case study is used to explore a new or understudied phenomenon. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to generate hypotheses or theories about the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an exploratory case study on a new technology to understand its potential impact on society. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as grounded theory or content analysis. The findings of an exploratory case study can be used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Descriptive Case Study

A descriptive case study is used to describe a particular phenomenon in detail. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to provide a comprehensive account of the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a descriptive case study on a particular community to understand its social and economic characteristics. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a descriptive case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Instrumental Case Study

An instrumental case study is used to understand a particular phenomenon that is instrumental in achieving a particular goal. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand the role of the phenomenon in achieving the goal.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an instrumental case study on a particular policy to understand its impact on achieving a particular goal, such as reducing poverty. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of an instrumental case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Case Study Data Collection Methods

Here are some common data collection methods for case studies:

Interviews involve asking questions to individuals who have knowledge or experience relevant to the case study. Interviews can be structured (where the same questions are asked to all participants) or unstructured (where the interviewer follows up on the responses with further questions). Interviews can be conducted in person, over the phone, or through video conferencing.

Observations

Observations involve watching and recording the behavior and activities of individuals or groups relevant to the case study. Observations can be participant (where the researcher actively participates in the activities) or non-participant (where the researcher observes from a distance). Observations can be recorded using notes, audio or video recordings, or photographs.

Documents can be used as a source of information for case studies. Documents can include reports, memos, emails, letters, and other written materials related to the case study. Documents can be collected from the case study participants or from public sources.

Surveys involve asking a set of questions to a sample of individuals relevant to the case study. Surveys can be administered in person, over the phone, through mail or email, or online. Surveys can be used to gather information on attitudes, opinions, or behaviors related to the case study.

Artifacts are physical objects relevant to the case study. Artifacts can include tools, equipment, products, or other objects that provide insights into the case study phenomenon.

How to conduct Case Study Research

Conducting a case study research involves several steps that need to be followed to ensure the quality and rigor of the study. Here are the steps to conduct case study research:

• Define the research questions: The first step in conducting a case study research is to define the research questions. The research questions should be specific, measurable, and relevant to the case study phenomenon under investigation.
• Select the case: The next step is to select the case or cases to be studied. The case should be relevant to the research questions and should provide rich and diverse data that can be used to answer the research questions.
• Collect data: Data can be collected using various methods, such as interviews, observations, documents, surveys, and artifacts. The data collection method should be selected based on the research questions and the nature of the case study phenomenon.
• Analyze the data: The data collected from the case study should be analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, or grounded theory. The analysis should be guided by the research questions and should aim to provide insights and conclusions relevant to the research questions.
• Draw conclusions: The conclusions drawn from the case study should be based on the data analysis and should be relevant to the research questions. The conclusions should be supported by evidence and should be clearly stated.
• Validate the findings: The findings of the case study should be validated by reviewing the data and the analysis with participants or other experts in the field. This helps to ensure the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Write the report: The final step is to write the report of the case study research. The report should provide a clear description of the case study phenomenon, the research questions, the data collection methods, the data analysis, the findings, and the conclusions. The report should be written in a clear and concise manner and should follow the guidelines for academic writing.

Examples of Case Study

Here are some examples of case study research:

• The Hawthorne Studies : Conducted between 1924 and 1932, the Hawthorne Studies were a series of case studies conducted by Elton Mayo and his colleagues to examine the impact of work environment on employee productivity. The studies were conducted at the Hawthorne Works plant of the Western Electric Company in Chicago and included interviews, observations, and experiments.
• The Stanford Prison Experiment: Conducted in 1971, the Stanford Prison Experiment was a case study conducted by Philip Zimbardo to examine the psychological effects of power and authority. The study involved simulating a prison environment and assigning participants to the role of guards or prisoners. The study was controversial due to the ethical issues it raised.
• The Challenger Disaster: The Challenger Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Space Shuttle Challenger explosion in 1986. The study included interviews, observations, and analysis of data to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.
• The Enron Scandal: The Enron Scandal was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Enron Corporation’s bankruptcy in 2001. The study included interviews, analysis of financial data, and review of documents to identify the accounting practices, corporate culture, and ethical issues that led to the company’s downfall.
• The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster : The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the nuclear accident that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan in 2011. The study included interviews, analysis of data, and review of documents to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.

Application of Case Study

Case studies have a wide range of applications across various fields and industries. Here are some examples:

Business and Management

Case studies are widely used in business and management to examine real-life situations and develop problem-solving skills. Case studies can help students and professionals to develop a deep understanding of business concepts, theories, and best practices.

Case studies are used in healthcare to examine patient care, treatment options, and outcomes. Case studies can help healthcare professionals to develop critical thinking skills, diagnose complex medical conditions, and develop effective treatment plans.

Case studies are used in education to examine teaching and learning practices. Case studies can help educators to develop effective teaching strategies, evaluate student progress, and identify areas for improvement.

Social Sciences

Case studies are widely used in social sciences to examine human behavior, social phenomena, and cultural practices. Case studies can help researchers to develop theories, test hypotheses, and gain insights into complex social issues.

Law and Ethics

Case studies are used in law and ethics to examine legal and ethical dilemmas. Case studies can help lawyers, policymakers, and ethical professionals to develop critical thinking skills, analyze complex cases, and make informed decisions.

Purpose of Case Study

The purpose of a case study is to provide a detailed analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. A case study is a qualitative research method that involves the in-depth exploration and analysis of a particular case, which can be an individual, group, organization, event, or community.

The primary purpose of a case study is to generate a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the case, including its history, context, and dynamics. Case studies can help researchers to identify and examine the underlying factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and detailed understanding of the case, which can inform future research, practice, or policy.

Case studies can also serve other purposes, including:

• Illustrating a theory or concept: Case studies can be used to illustrate and explain theoretical concepts and frameworks, providing concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Developing hypotheses: Case studies can help to generate hypotheses about the causal relationships between different factors and outcomes, which can be tested through further research.
• Providing insight into complex issues: Case studies can provide insights into complex and multifaceted issues, which may be difficult to understand through other research methods.
• Informing practice or policy: Case studies can be used to inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.

Advantages of Case Study Research

There are several advantages of case study research, including:

• In-depth exploration: Case study research allows for a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. This can provide a comprehensive understanding of the case and its dynamics, which may not be possible through other research methods.
• Rich data: Case study research can generate rich and detailed data, including qualitative data such as interviews, observations, and documents. This can provide a nuanced understanding of the case and its complexity.
• Holistic perspective: Case study research allows for a holistic perspective of the case, taking into account the various factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the case.
• Theory development: Case study research can help to develop and refine theories and concepts by providing empirical evidence and concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Practical application: Case study research can inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.
• Contextualization: Case study research takes into account the specific context in which the case is situated, which can help to understand how the case is influenced by the social, cultural, and historical factors of its environment.

Limitations of Case Study Research

There are several limitations of case study research, including:

• Limited generalizability : Case studies are typically focused on a single case or a small number of cases, which limits the generalizability of the findings. The unique characteristics of the case may not be applicable to other contexts or populations, which may limit the external validity of the research.
• Biased sampling: Case studies may rely on purposive or convenience sampling, which can introduce bias into the sample selection process. This may limit the representativeness of the sample and the generalizability of the findings.
• Subjectivity: Case studies rely on the interpretation of the researcher, which can introduce subjectivity into the analysis. The researcher’s own biases, assumptions, and perspectives may influence the findings, which may limit the objectivity of the research.
• Limited control: Case studies are typically conducted in naturalistic settings, which limits the control that the researcher has over the environment and the variables being studied. This may limit the ability to establish causal relationships between variables.
• Time-consuming: Case studies can be time-consuming to conduct, as they typically involve a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific case. This may limit the feasibility of conducting multiple case studies or conducting case studies in a timely manner.
• Resource-intensive: Case studies may require significant resources, including time, funding, and expertise. This may limit the ability of researchers to conduct case studies in resource-constrained settings.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Correlational Research – Methods, Types and...

Basic Research – Types, Methods and Examples

One-to-One Interview – Methods and Guide

Mixed Methods Research – Types & Analysis

Transformative Design – Methods, Types, Guide

Quasi-Experimental Research Design – Types...

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Download Free PDF

Final Exam Review for Research Methodology (RES301)

Research Methodology final exam review

Related papers

research proposal is a comprehensive plan for a research project. It is a written description of a research plan that has to be undertaken. It determines the specific areas of research, states the purpose, scope, methodology, overall organization and limitations of the study. It also estimates its requirements for equipment (if necessary), finance and possible personnel.

Fundamental_of_Research_Methods and Statisti

STUDIA ARCHAEOLOGICA, 2023

For the first time, a Mongol-era walled enclosure was discovered on the right, eastern bank of the Orkhon in Arkhangai aimag. Its documentation was carried out with a fixed-wing eBee X drone. The design of the settlement, comparative examples and artifacts are briefly described. It was only used during the 13th/14th century CE and testifies to the intensive development of the Orkhon Valley during the Mongol Empire.

Universal Journal of Public Health, 2024

Journal of Financial Economic Policy, 2023

Women and Monastic Reform in the Medieval West, c. 1000 - 1500. Debating Identities, Creating Communities, ed. by Julie Hotchin and Jirki Thibaut, https://boydellandbrewer.com/9781837650491/women-and-monastic-reform-in-the-medieval-west-c-1000-1500/, 2023

links-netz.de, 2024

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research), 2023

Psychoactives

In : "Hiatus, lacunes et absences : identifier et interpréter les vides archéologiques", Actes du 29e Congrès préhistorique de France, 31 mai-4 juin 2021, Toulouse, Session "Réseaux de transferts matériels, aires chronoculturelles : le visible et l’invisible", SPF, p.57-78, 2023

Skenegraphie, 2016

Revue de l'Electricité et de l'Electronique, 2004

General hospital psychiatry, 2015

Turkish Bulletin of Hygiene and Experimental Biology, 2012

Acta Scientiarum. Technology, 2006

Innovation in Aging, 2019

Forensic science international, 2017

RIDAS, 2019

La Marea, 2024

Related topics

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

What is case study research?

Last updated

8 February 2023

Reviewed by

Cathy Heath

Short on time? Get an AI generated summary of this article instead

Suppose a company receives a spike in the number of customer complaints, or medical experts discover an outbreak of illness affecting children but are not quite sure of the reason. In both cases, carrying out a case study could be the best way to get answers.

Organization

Case studies can be carried out across different disciplines, including education, medicine, sociology, and business.

Most case studies employ qualitative methods, but quantitative methods can also be used. Researchers can then describe, compare, evaluate, and identify patterns or cause-and-effect relationships between the various variables under study. They can then use this knowledge to decide what action to take. 

Another thing to note is that case studies are generally singular in their focus. This means they narrow focus to a particular area, making them highly subjective. You cannot always generalize the results of a case study and apply them to a larger population. However, they are valuable tools to illustrate a principle or develop a thesis.

Analyze case study research

Dovetail streamlines case study research to help you uncover and share actionable insights

• What are the different types of case study designs?

Researchers can choose from a variety of case study designs. The design they choose is dependent on what questions they need to answer, the context of the research environment, how much data they already have, and what resources are available.

Here are the common types of case study design:

Explanatory

An explanatory case study is an initial explanation of the how or why that is behind something. This design is commonly used when studying a real-life phenomenon or event. Once the organization understands the reasons behind a phenomenon, it can then make changes to enhance or eliminate the variables causing it. 

Here is an example: How is co-teaching implemented in elementary schools? The title for a case study of this subject could be “Case Study of the Implementation of Co-Teaching in Elementary Schools.”

Descriptive

An illustrative or descriptive case study helps researchers shed light on an unfamiliar object or subject after a period of time. The case study provides an in-depth review of the issue at hand and adds real-world examples in the area the researcher wants the audience to understand. 

The researcher makes no inferences or causal statements about the object or subject under review. This type of design is often used to understand cultural shifts.

Here is an example: How did people cope with the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami? This case study could be titled "A Case Study of the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami and its Effect on the Indonesian Population."

Exploratory

Exploratory research is also called a pilot case study. It is usually the first step within a larger research project, often relying on questionnaires and surveys . Researchers use exploratory research to help narrow down their focus, define parameters, draft a specific research question , and/or identify variables in a larger study. This research design usually covers a wider area than others, and focuses on the ‘what’ and ‘who’ of a topic.

Here is an example: How do nutrition and socialization in early childhood affect learning in children? The title of the exploratory study may be “Case Study of the Effects of Nutrition and Socialization on Learning in Early Childhood.”

An intrinsic case study is specifically designed to look at a unique and special phenomenon. At the start of the study, the researcher defines the phenomenon and the uniqueness that differentiates it from others. 

In this case, researchers do not attempt to generalize, compare, or challenge the existing assumptions. Instead, they explore the unique variables to enhance understanding. Here is an example: “Case Study of Volcanic Lightning.”

This design can also be identified as a cumulative case study. It uses information from past studies or observations of groups of people in certain settings as the foundation of the new study. Given that it takes multiple areas into account, it allows for greater generalization than a single case study. 

The researchers also get an in-depth look at a particular subject from different viewpoints.  Here is an example: “Case Study of how PTSD affected Vietnam and Gulf War Veterans Differently Due to Advances in Military Technology.”

Critical instance

A critical case study incorporates both explanatory and intrinsic study designs. It does not have predetermined purposes beyond an investigation of the said subject. It can be used for a deeper explanation of the cause-and-effect relationship. It can also be used to question a common assumption or myth. 

The findings can then be used further to generalize whether they would also apply in a different environment.  Here is an example: “What Effect Does Prolonged Use of Social Media Have on the Mind of American Youth?”

Instrumental

Instrumental research attempts to achieve goals beyond understanding the object at hand. Researchers explore a larger subject through different, separate studies and use the findings to understand its relationship to another subject. This type of design also provides insight into an issue or helps refine a theory. 

For example, you may want to determine if violent behavior in children predisposes them to crime later in life. The focus is on the relationship between children and violent behavior, and why certain children do become violent. Here is an example: “Violence Breeds Violence: Childhood Exposure and Participation in Adult Crime.”

Evaluation case study design is employed to research the effects of a program, policy, or intervention, and assess its effectiveness and impact on future decision-making. 

For example, you might want to see whether children learn times tables quicker through an educational game on their iPad versus a more teacher-led intervention. Here is an example: “An Investigation of the Impact of an iPad Multiplication Game for Primary School Children.” 

• When do you use case studies?

Case studies are ideal when you want to gain a contextual, concrete, or in-depth understanding of a particular subject. It helps you understand the characteristics, implications, and meanings of the subject.

They are also an excellent choice for those writing a thesis or dissertation, as they help keep the project focused on a particular area when resources or time may be too limited to cover a wider one. You may have to conduct several case studies to explore different aspects of the subject in question and understand the problem.

• What are the steps to follow when conducting a case study?

1. Select a case

Once you identify the problem at hand and come up with questions, identify the case you will focus on. The study can provide insights into the subject at hand, challenge existing assumptions, propose a course of action, and/or open up new areas for further research.

2. Create a theoretical framework

While you will be focusing on a specific detail, the case study design you choose should be linked to existing knowledge on the topic. This prevents it from becoming an isolated description and allows for enhancing the existing information. 

It may expand the current theory by bringing up new ideas or concepts, challenge established assumptions, or exemplify a theory by exploring how it answers the problem at hand. A theoretical framework starts with a literature review of the sources relevant to the topic in focus. This helps in identifying key concepts to guide analysis and interpretation.

3. Collect the data

Case studies are frequently supplemented with qualitative data such as observations, interviews, and a review of both primary and secondary sources such as official records, news articles, and photographs. There may also be quantitative data —this data assists in understanding the case thoroughly.

4. Analyze your case

The results of the research depend on the research design. Most case studies are structured with chapters or topic headings for easy explanation and presentation. Others may be written as narratives to allow researchers to explore various angles of the topic and analyze its meanings and implications.

In all areas, always give a detailed contextual understanding of the case and connect it to the existing theory and literature before discussing how it fits into your problem area.

• What are some case study examples?

What are the best approaches for introducing our product into the Kenyan market?

How does the change in marketing strategy aid in increasing the sales volumes of product Y?

How can teachers enhance student participation in classrooms?

How does poverty affect literacy levels in children?

Case study topics

Case study of product marketing strategies in the Kenyan market

Case study of the effects of a marketing strategy change on product Y sales volumes

Case study of X school teachers that encourage active student participation in the classroom

Case study of the effects of poverty on literacy levels in children

Should you be using a customer insights hub?

Do you want to discover previous research faster?

Do you share your research findings with others?

Do you analyze research data?

Start for free today, add your research, and get to key insights faster

Editor’s picks

Last updated: 30 January 2024

Last updated: 11 January 2024

Last updated: 17 January 2024

Last updated: 12 December 2023

Last updated: 30 April 2024

Last updated: 4 July 2024

Last updated: 12 October 2023

Last updated: 5 March 2024

Last updated: 6 March 2024

Last updated: 31 January 2024

Last updated: 23 January 2024

Last updated: 13 May 2024

Last updated: 20 December 2023

Latest articles

Related topics, decide what to build next, log in or sign up.

Get started for free

• Open access
• Published: 27 June 2011

The case study approach

• Sarah Crowe 1 ,
• Kathrin Cresswell 2 ,
• Ann Robertson 2 ,
• Guro Huby 3 ,
• Anthony Avery 1 &
• Aziz Sheikh 2  

BMC Medical Research Methodology volume  11 , Article number:  100 ( 2011 ) Cite this article

806k Accesses

1148 Citations

42 Altmetric

Metrics details

The case study approach allows in-depth, multi-faceted explorations of complex issues in their real-life settings. The value of the case study approach is well recognised in the fields of business, law and policy, but somewhat less so in health services research. Based on our experiences of conducting several health-related case studies, we reflect on the different types of case study design, the specific research questions this approach can help answer, the data sources that tend to be used, and the particular advantages and disadvantages of employing this methodological approach. The paper concludes with key pointers to aid those designing and appraising proposals for conducting case study research, and a checklist to help readers assess the quality of case study reports.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The case study approach is particularly useful to employ when there is a need to obtain an in-depth appreciation of an issue, event or phenomenon of interest, in its natural real-life context. Our aim in writing this piece is to provide insights into when to consider employing this approach and an overview of key methodological considerations in relation to the design, planning, analysis, interpretation and reporting of case studies.

The illustrative 'grand round', 'case report' and 'case series' have a long tradition in clinical practice and research. Presenting detailed critiques, typically of one or more patients, aims to provide insights into aspects of the clinical case and, in doing so, illustrate broader lessons that may be learnt. In research, the conceptually-related case study approach can be used, for example, to describe in detail a patient's episode of care, explore professional attitudes to and experiences of a new policy initiative or service development or more generally to 'investigate contemporary phenomena within its real-life context' [ 1 ]. Based on our experiences of conducting a range of case studies, we reflect on when to consider using this approach, discuss the key steps involved and illustrate, with examples, some of the practical challenges of attaining an in-depth understanding of a 'case' as an integrated whole. In keeping with previously published work, we acknowledge the importance of theory to underpin the design, selection, conduct and interpretation of case studies[ 2 ]. In so doing, we make passing reference to the different epistemological approaches used in case study research by key theoreticians and methodologists in this field of enquiry.

This paper is structured around the following main questions: What is a case study? What are case studies used for? How are case studies conducted? What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided? We draw in particular on four of our own recently published examples of case studies (see Tables 1 , 2 , 3 and 4 ) and those of others to illustrate our discussion[ 3 – 7 ].

What is a case study?

A case study is a research approach that is used to generate an in-depth, multi-faceted understanding of a complex issue in its real-life context. It is an established research design that is used extensively in a wide variety of disciplines, particularly in the social sciences. A case study can be defined in a variety of ways (Table 5 ), the central tenet being the need to explore an event or phenomenon in depth and in its natural context. It is for this reason sometimes referred to as a "naturalistic" design; this is in contrast to an "experimental" design (such as a randomised controlled trial) in which the investigator seeks to exert control over and manipulate the variable(s) of interest.

Stake's work has been particularly influential in defining the case study approach to scientific enquiry. He has helpfully characterised three main types of case study: intrinsic , instrumental and collective [ 8 ]. An intrinsic case study is typically undertaken to learn about a unique phenomenon. The researcher should define the uniqueness of the phenomenon, which distinguishes it from all others. In contrast, the instrumental case study uses a particular case (some of which may be better than others) to gain a broader appreciation of an issue or phenomenon. The collective case study involves studying multiple cases simultaneously or sequentially in an attempt to generate a still broader appreciation of a particular issue.

These are however not necessarily mutually exclusive categories. In the first of our examples (Table 1 ), we undertook an intrinsic case study to investigate the issue of recruitment of minority ethnic people into the specific context of asthma research studies, but it developed into a instrumental case study through seeking to understand the issue of recruitment of these marginalised populations more generally, generating a number of the findings that are potentially transferable to other disease contexts[ 3 ]. In contrast, the other three examples (see Tables 2 , 3 and 4 ) employed collective case study designs to study the introduction of workforce reconfiguration in primary care, the implementation of electronic health records into hospitals, and to understand the ways in which healthcare students learn about patient safety considerations[ 4 – 6 ]. Although our study focusing on the introduction of General Practitioners with Specialist Interests (Table 2 ) was explicitly collective in design (four contrasting primary care organisations were studied), is was also instrumental in that this particular professional group was studied as an exemplar of the more general phenomenon of workforce redesign[ 4 ].

What are case studies used for?

According to Yin, case studies can be used to explain, describe or explore events or phenomena in the everyday contexts in which they occur[ 1 ]. These can, for example, help to understand and explain causal links and pathways resulting from a new policy initiative or service development (see Tables 2 and 3 , for example)[ 1 ]. In contrast to experimental designs, which seek to test a specific hypothesis through deliberately manipulating the environment (like, for example, in a randomised controlled trial giving a new drug to randomly selected individuals and then comparing outcomes with controls),[ 9 ] the case study approach lends itself well to capturing information on more explanatory ' how ', 'what' and ' why ' questions, such as ' how is the intervention being implemented and received on the ground?'. The case study approach can offer additional insights into what gaps exist in its delivery or why one implementation strategy might be chosen over another. This in turn can help develop or refine theory, as shown in our study of the teaching of patient safety in undergraduate curricula (Table 4 )[ 6 , 10 ]. Key questions to consider when selecting the most appropriate study design are whether it is desirable or indeed possible to undertake a formal experimental investigation in which individuals and/or organisations are allocated to an intervention or control arm? Or whether the wish is to obtain a more naturalistic understanding of an issue? The former is ideally studied using a controlled experimental design, whereas the latter is more appropriately studied using a case study design.

Case studies may be approached in different ways depending on the epistemological standpoint of the researcher, that is, whether they take a critical (questioning one's own and others' assumptions), interpretivist (trying to understand individual and shared social meanings) or positivist approach (orientating towards the criteria of natural sciences, such as focusing on generalisability considerations) (Table 6 ). Whilst such a schema can be conceptually helpful, it may be appropriate to draw on more than one approach in any case study, particularly in the context of conducting health services research. Doolin has, for example, noted that in the context of undertaking interpretative case studies, researchers can usefully draw on a critical, reflective perspective which seeks to take into account the wider social and political environment that has shaped the case[ 11 ].

How are case studies conducted?

Here, we focus on the main stages of research activity when planning and undertaking a case study; the crucial stages are: defining the case; selecting the case(s); collecting and analysing the data; interpreting data; and reporting the findings.

Defining the case

Carefully formulated research question(s), informed by the existing literature and a prior appreciation of the theoretical issues and setting(s), are all important in appropriately and succinctly defining the case[ 8 , 12 ]. Crucially, each case should have a pre-defined boundary which clarifies the nature and time period covered by the case study (i.e. its scope, beginning and end), the relevant social group, organisation or geographical area of interest to the investigator, the types of evidence to be collected, and the priorities for data collection and analysis (see Table 7 )[ 1 ]. A theory driven approach to defining the case may help generate knowledge that is potentially transferable to a range of clinical contexts and behaviours; using theory is also likely to result in a more informed appreciation of, for example, how and why interventions have succeeded or failed[ 13 ].

For example, in our evaluation of the introduction of electronic health records in English hospitals (Table 3 ), we defined our cases as the NHS Trusts that were receiving the new technology[ 5 ]. Our focus was on how the technology was being implemented. However, if the primary research interest had been on the social and organisational dimensions of implementation, we might have defined our case differently as a grouping of healthcare professionals (e.g. doctors and/or nurses). The precise beginning and end of the case may however prove difficult to define. Pursuing this same example, when does the process of implementation and adoption of an electronic health record system really begin or end? Such judgements will inevitably be influenced by a range of factors, including the research question, theory of interest, the scope and richness of the gathered data and the resources available to the research team.

Selecting the case(s)

The decision on how to select the case(s) to study is a very important one that merits some reflection. In an intrinsic case study, the case is selected on its own merits[ 8 ]. The case is selected not because it is representative of other cases, but because of its uniqueness, which is of genuine interest to the researchers. This was, for example, the case in our study of the recruitment of minority ethnic participants into asthma research (Table 1 ) as our earlier work had demonstrated the marginalisation of minority ethnic people with asthma, despite evidence of disproportionate asthma morbidity[ 14 , 15 ]. In another example of an intrinsic case study, Hellstrom et al.[ 16 ] studied an elderly married couple living with dementia to explore how dementia had impacted on their understanding of home, their everyday life and their relationships.

For an instrumental case study, selecting a "typical" case can work well[ 8 ]. In contrast to the intrinsic case study, the particular case which is chosen is of less importance than selecting a case that allows the researcher to investigate an issue or phenomenon. For example, in order to gain an understanding of doctors' responses to health policy initiatives, Som undertook an instrumental case study interviewing clinicians who had a range of responsibilities for clinical governance in one NHS acute hospital trust[ 17 ]. Sampling a "deviant" or "atypical" case may however prove even more informative, potentially enabling the researcher to identify causal processes, generate hypotheses and develop theory.

In collective or multiple case studies, a number of cases are carefully selected. This offers the advantage of allowing comparisons to be made across several cases and/or replication. Choosing a "typical" case may enable the findings to be generalised to theory (i.e. analytical generalisation) or to test theory by replicating the findings in a second or even a third case (i.e. replication logic)[ 1 ]. Yin suggests two or three literal replications (i.e. predicting similar results) if the theory is straightforward and five or more if the theory is more subtle. However, critics might argue that selecting 'cases' in this way is insufficiently reflexive and ill-suited to the complexities of contemporary healthcare organisations.

The selected case study site(s) should allow the research team access to the group of individuals, the organisation, the processes or whatever else constitutes the chosen unit of analysis for the study. Access is therefore a central consideration; the researcher needs to come to know the case study site(s) well and to work cooperatively with them. Selected cases need to be not only interesting but also hospitable to the inquiry [ 8 ] if they are to be informative and answer the research question(s). Case study sites may also be pre-selected for the researcher, with decisions being influenced by key stakeholders. For example, our selection of case study sites in the evaluation of the implementation and adoption of electronic health record systems (see Table 3 ) was heavily influenced by NHS Connecting for Health, the government agency that was responsible for overseeing the National Programme for Information Technology (NPfIT)[ 5 ]. This prominent stakeholder had already selected the NHS sites (through a competitive bidding process) to be early adopters of the electronic health record systems and had negotiated contracts that detailed the deployment timelines.

It is also important to consider in advance the likely burden and risks associated with participation for those who (or the site(s) which) comprise the case study. Of particular importance is the obligation for the researcher to think through the ethical implications of the study (e.g. the risk of inadvertently breaching anonymity or confidentiality) and to ensure that potential participants/participating sites are provided with sufficient information to make an informed choice about joining the study. The outcome of providing this information might be that the emotive burden associated with participation, or the organisational disruption associated with supporting the fieldwork, is considered so high that the individuals or sites decide against participation.

In our example of evaluating implementations of electronic health record systems, given the restricted number of early adopter sites available to us, we sought purposively to select a diverse range of implementation cases among those that were available[ 5 ]. We chose a mixture of teaching, non-teaching and Foundation Trust hospitals, and examples of each of the three electronic health record systems procured centrally by the NPfIT. At one recruited site, it quickly became apparent that access was problematic because of competing demands on that organisation. Recognising the importance of full access and co-operative working for generating rich data, the research team decided not to pursue work at that site and instead to focus on other recruited sites.

Collecting the data

In order to develop a thorough understanding of the case, the case study approach usually involves the collection of multiple sources of evidence, using a range of quantitative (e.g. questionnaires, audits and analysis of routinely collected healthcare data) and more commonly qualitative techniques (e.g. interviews, focus groups and observations). The use of multiple sources of data (data triangulation) has been advocated as a way of increasing the internal validity of a study (i.e. the extent to which the method is appropriate to answer the research question)[ 8 , 18 – 21 ]. An underlying assumption is that data collected in different ways should lead to similar conclusions, and approaching the same issue from different angles can help develop a holistic picture of the phenomenon (Table 2 )[ 4 ].

Brazier and colleagues used a mixed-methods case study approach to investigate the impact of a cancer care programme[ 22 ]. Here, quantitative measures were collected with questionnaires before, and five months after, the start of the intervention which did not yield any statistically significant results. Qualitative interviews with patients however helped provide an insight into potentially beneficial process-related aspects of the programme, such as greater, perceived patient involvement in care. The authors reported how this case study approach provided a number of contextual factors likely to influence the effectiveness of the intervention and which were not likely to have been obtained from quantitative methods alone.

In collective or multiple case studies, data collection needs to be flexible enough to allow a detailed description of each individual case to be developed (e.g. the nature of different cancer care programmes), before considering the emerging similarities and differences in cross-case comparisons (e.g. to explore why one programme is more effective than another). It is important that data sources from different cases are, where possible, broadly comparable for this purpose even though they may vary in nature and depth.

Analysing, interpreting and reporting case studies

Making sense and offering a coherent interpretation of the typically disparate sources of data (whether qualitative alone or together with quantitative) is far from straightforward. Repeated reviewing and sorting of the voluminous and detail-rich data are integral to the process of analysis. In collective case studies, it is helpful to analyse data relating to the individual component cases first, before making comparisons across cases. Attention needs to be paid to variations within each case and, where relevant, the relationship between different causes, effects and outcomes[ 23 ]. Data will need to be organised and coded to allow the key issues, both derived from the literature and emerging from the dataset, to be easily retrieved at a later stage. An initial coding frame can help capture these issues and can be applied systematically to the whole dataset with the aid of a qualitative data analysis software package.

The Framework approach is a practical approach, comprising of five stages (familiarisation; identifying a thematic framework; indexing; charting; mapping and interpretation) , to managing and analysing large datasets particularly if time is limited, as was the case in our study of recruitment of South Asians into asthma research (Table 1 )[ 3 , 24 ]. Theoretical frameworks may also play an important role in integrating different sources of data and examining emerging themes. For example, we drew on a socio-technical framework to help explain the connections between different elements - technology; people; and the organisational settings within which they worked - in our study of the introduction of electronic health record systems (Table 3 )[ 5 ]. Our study of patient safety in undergraduate curricula drew on an evaluation-based approach to design and analysis, which emphasised the importance of the academic, organisational and practice contexts through which students learn (Table 4 )[ 6 ].

Case study findings can have implications both for theory development and theory testing. They may establish, strengthen or weaken historical explanations of a case and, in certain circumstances, allow theoretical (as opposed to statistical) generalisation beyond the particular cases studied[ 12 ]. These theoretical lenses should not, however, constitute a strait-jacket and the cases should not be "forced to fit" the particular theoretical framework that is being employed.

When reporting findings, it is important to provide the reader with enough contextual information to understand the processes that were followed and how the conclusions were reached. In a collective case study, researchers may choose to present the findings from individual cases separately before amalgamating across cases. Care must be taken to ensure the anonymity of both case sites and individual participants (if agreed in advance) by allocating appropriate codes or withholding descriptors. In the example given in Table 3 , we decided against providing detailed information on the NHS sites and individual participants in order to avoid the risk of inadvertent disclosure of identities[ 5 , 25 ].

What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided?

The case study approach is, as with all research, not without its limitations. When investigating the formal and informal ways undergraduate students learn about patient safety (Table 4 ), for example, we rapidly accumulated a large quantity of data. The volume of data, together with the time restrictions in place, impacted on the depth of analysis that was possible within the available resources. This highlights a more general point of the importance of avoiding the temptation to collect as much data as possible; adequate time also needs to be set aside for data analysis and interpretation of what are often highly complex datasets.

Case study research has sometimes been criticised for lacking scientific rigour and providing little basis for generalisation (i.e. producing findings that may be transferable to other settings)[ 1 ]. There are several ways to address these concerns, including: the use of theoretical sampling (i.e. drawing on a particular conceptual framework); respondent validation (i.e. participants checking emerging findings and the researcher's interpretation, and providing an opinion as to whether they feel these are accurate); and transparency throughout the research process (see Table 8 )[ 8 , 18 – 21 , 23 , 26 ]. Transparency can be achieved by describing in detail the steps involved in case selection, data collection, the reasons for the particular methods chosen, and the researcher's background and level of involvement (i.e. being explicit about how the researcher has influenced data collection and interpretation). Seeking potential, alternative explanations, and being explicit about how interpretations and conclusions were reached, help readers to judge the trustworthiness of the case study report. Stake provides a critique checklist for a case study report (Table 9 )[ 8 ].

Conclusions

The case study approach allows, amongst other things, critical events, interventions, policy developments and programme-based service reforms to be studied in detail in a real-life context. It should therefore be considered when an experimental design is either inappropriate to answer the research questions posed or impossible to undertake. Considering the frequency with which implementations of innovations are now taking place in healthcare settings and how well the case study approach lends itself to in-depth, complex health service research, we believe this approach should be more widely considered by researchers. Though inherently challenging, the research case study can, if carefully conceptualised and thoughtfully undertaken and reported, yield powerful insights into many important aspects of health and healthcare delivery.

Yin RK: Case study research, design and method. 2009, London: Sage Publications Ltd., 4

Google Scholar  

Keen J, Packwood T: Qualitative research; case study evaluation. BMJ. 1995, 311: 444-446.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Sheikh A, Halani L, Bhopal R, Netuveli G, Partridge M, Car J, et al: Facilitating the Recruitment of Minority Ethnic People into Research: Qualitative Case Study of South Asians and Asthma. PLoS Med. 2009, 6 (10): 1-11.

Article   Google Scholar  

Pinnock H, Huby G, Powell A, Kielmann T, Price D, Williams S, et al: The process of planning, development and implementation of a General Practitioner with a Special Interest service in Primary Care Organisations in England and Wales: a comparative prospective case study. Report for the National Co-ordinating Centre for NHS Service Delivery and Organisation R&D (NCCSDO). 2008, [ http://www.sdo.nihr.ac.uk/files/project/99-final-report.pdf ]

Robertson A, Cresswell K, Takian A, Petrakaki D, Crowe S, Cornford T, et al: Prospective evaluation of the implementation and adoption of NHS Connecting for Health's national electronic health record in secondary care in England: interim findings. BMJ. 2010, 41: c4564-

Pearson P, Steven A, Howe A, Sheikh A, Ashcroft D, Smith P, the Patient Safety Education Study Group: Learning about patient safety: organisational context and culture in the education of healthcare professionals. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2010, 15: 4-10. 10.1258/jhsrp.2009.009052.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

van Harten WH, Casparie TF, Fisscher OA: The evaluation of the introduction of a quality management system: a process-oriented case study in a large rehabilitation hospital. Health Policy. 2002, 60 (1): 17-37. 10.1016/S0168-8510(01)00187-7.

Stake RE: The art of case study research. 1995, London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Sheikh A, Smeeth L, Ashcroft R: Randomised controlled trials in primary care: scope and application. Br J Gen Pract. 2002, 52 (482): 746-51.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

King G, Keohane R, Verba S: Designing Social Inquiry. 1996, Princeton: Princeton University Press

Doolin B: Information technology as disciplinary technology: being critical in interpretative research on information systems. Journal of Information Technology. 1998, 13: 301-311. 10.1057/jit.1998.8.

George AL, Bennett A: Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. 2005, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Eccles M, the Improved Clinical Effectiveness through Behavioural Research Group (ICEBeRG): Designing theoretically-informed implementation interventions. Implementation Science. 2006, 1: 1-8. 10.1186/1748-5908-1-1.

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Netuveli G, Hurwitz B, Levy M, Fletcher M, Barnes G, Durham SR, Sheikh A: Ethnic variations in UK asthma frequency, morbidity, and health-service use: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2005, 365 (9456): 312-7.

Sheikh A, Panesar SS, Lasserson T, Netuveli G: Recruitment of ethnic minorities to asthma studies. Thorax. 2004, 59 (7): 634-

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hellström I, Nolan M, Lundh U: 'We do things together': A case study of 'couplehood' in dementia. Dementia. 2005, 4: 7-22. 10.1177/1471301205049188.

Som CV: Nothing seems to have changed, nothing seems to be changing and perhaps nothing will change in the NHS: doctors' response to clinical governance. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 2005, 18: 463-477. 10.1108/09513550510608903.

Lincoln Y, Guba E: Naturalistic inquiry. 1985, Newbury Park: Sage Publications

Barbour RS: Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog?. BMJ. 2001, 322: 1115-1117. 10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115.

Mays N, Pope C: Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ. 2000, 320: 50-52. 10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50.

Mason J: Qualitative researching. 2002, London: Sage

Brazier A, Cooke K, Moravan V: Using Mixed Methods for Evaluating an Integrative Approach to Cancer Care: A Case Study. Integr Cancer Ther. 2008, 7: 5-17. 10.1177/1534735407313395.

Miles MB, Huberman M: Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. 1994, CA: Sage Publications Inc., 2

Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays N: Analysing qualitative data. Qualitative research in health care. BMJ. 2000, 320: 114-116. 10.1136/bmj.320.7227.114.

Cresswell KM, Worth A, Sheikh A: Actor-Network Theory and its role in understanding the implementation of information technology developments in healthcare. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010, 10 (1): 67-10.1186/1472-6947-10-67.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Malterud K: Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet. 2001, 358: 483-488. 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05627-6.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Yin R: Case study research: design and methods. 1994, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing, 2

Yin R: Enhancing the quality of case studies in health services research. Health Serv Res. 1999, 34: 1209-1224.

Green J, Thorogood N: Qualitative methods for health research. 2009, Los Angeles: Sage, 2

Howcroft D, Trauth E: Handbook of Critical Information Systems Research, Theory and Application. 2005, Cheltenham, UK: Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar

Book   Google Scholar  

Blakie N: Approaches to Social Enquiry. 1993, Cambridge: Polity Press

Doolin B: Power and resistance in the implementation of a medical management information system. Info Systems J. 2004, 14: 343-362. 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2004.00176.x.

Bloomfield BP, Best A: Management consultants: systems development, power and the translation of problems. Sociological Review. 1992, 40: 533-560.

Shanks G, Parr A: Positivist, single case study research in information systems: A critical analysis. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems. 2003, Naples

Pre-publication history

The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/11/100/prepub

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the participants and colleagues who contributed to the individual case studies that we have drawn on. This work received no direct funding, but it has been informed by projects funded by Asthma UK, the NHS Service Delivery Organisation, NHS Connecting for Health Evaluation Programme, and Patient Safety Research Portfolio. We would also like to thank the expert reviewers for their insightful and constructive feedback. Our thanks are also due to Dr. Allison Worth who commented on an earlier draft of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Division of Primary Care, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

Sarah Crowe & Anthony Avery

Centre for Population Health Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

Kathrin Cresswell, Ann Robertson & Aziz Sheikh

School of Health in Social Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah Crowe .

Additional information

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

AS conceived this article. SC, KC and AR wrote this paper with GH, AA and AS all commenting on various drafts. SC and AS are guarantors.

Rights and permissions

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A. et al. The case study approach. BMC Med Res Methodol 11 , 100 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Download citation

Received : 29 November 2010

Accepted : 27 June 2011

Published : 27 June 2011

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Case Study Approach
• Electronic Health Record System
• Case Study Design
• Case Study Site
• Case Study Report

BMC Medical Research Methodology

ISSN: 1471-2288

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper: Writing a Case Study

• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Reading Research Effectively
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Annotated Bibliography
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Essays
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Bibliography

The term case study refers to both a method of analysis and a specific research design for examining a problem, both of which are used in most circumstances to generalize across populations. This tab focuses on the latter--how to design and organize a research paper in the social sciences that analyzes a specific case.

A case study research paper examines a person, place, event, phenomenon, or other type of subject of analysis in order to extrapolate  key themes and results that help predict future trends, illuminate previously hidden issues that can be applied to practice, and/or provide a means for understanding an important research problem with greater clarity. A case study paper usually examines a single subject of analysis, but case study papers can also be designed as a comparative investigation that shows relationships between two or among more than two subjects. The methods used to study a case can rest within a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method investigative paradigm.

Case Studies . Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Mills, Albert J. , Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010 ; “What is a Case Study?” In Swanborn, Peter G. Case Study Research: What, Why and How? London: SAGE, 2010.

How to Approach Writing a Case Study Research Paper

General information about how to choose a topic to investigate can be found under the " Choosing a Research Problem " tab in this writing guide. Review this page because it may help you identify a subject of analysis that can be investigated using a single case study design.

However, identifying a case to investigate involves more than choosing the research problem . A case study encompasses a problem contextualized around the application of in-depth analysis, interpretation, and discussion, often resulting in specific recommendations for action or for improving existing conditions. As Seawright and Gerring note, practical considerations such as time and access to information can influence case selection, but these issues should not be the sole factors used in describing the methodological justification for identifying a particular case to study. Given this, selecting a case includes considering the following:

• Does the case represent an unusual or atypical example of a research problem that requires more in-depth analysis? Cases often represent a topic that rests on the fringes of prior investigations because the case may provide new ways of understanding the research problem. For example, if the research problem is to identify strategies to improve policies that support girl's access to secondary education in predominantly Muslim nations, you could consider using Azerbaijan as a case study rather than selecting a more obvious nation in the Middle East. Doing so may reveal important new insights into recommending how governments in other predominantly Muslim nations can formulate policies that support improved access to education for girls.
• Does the case provide important insight or illuminate a previously hidden problem? In-depth analysis of a case can be based on the hypothesis that the case study will reveal trends or issues that have not been exposed in prior research or will reveal new and important implications for practice. For example, anecdotal evidence may suggest drug use among homeless veterans is related to their patterns of travel throughout the day. Assuming prior studies have not looked at individual travel choices as a way to study access to illicit drug use, a case study that observes a homeless veteran could reveal how issues of personal mobility choices facilitate regular access to illicit drugs. Note that it is important to conduct a thorough literature review to ensure that your assumption about the need to reveal new insights or previously hidden problems is valid and evidence-based.
• Does the case challenge and offer a counter-point to prevailing assumptions? Over time, research on any given topic can fall into a trap of developing assumptions based on outdated studies that are still applied to new or changing conditions or the idea that something should simply be accepted as "common sense," even though the issue has not been thoroughly tested in practice. A case may offer you an opportunity to gather evidence that challenges prevailing assumptions about a research problem and provide a new set of recommendations applied to practice that have not been tested previously. For example, perhaps there has been a long practice among scholars to apply a particular theory in explaining the relationship between two subjects of analysis. Your case could challenge this assumption by applying an innovative theoretical framework [perhaps borrowed from another discipline] to the study a case in order to explore whether this approach offers new ways of understanding the research problem. Taking a contrarian stance is one of the most important ways that new knowledge and understanding develops from existing literature.
• Does the case provide an opportunity to pursue action leading to the resolution of a problem? Another way to think about choosing a case to study is to consider how the results from investigating a particular case may result in findings that reveal ways in which to resolve an existing or emerging problem. For example, studying the case of an unforeseen incident, such as a fatal accident at a railroad crossing, can reveal hidden issues that could be applied to preventative measures that contribute to reducing the chance of accidents in the future. In this example, a case study investigating the accident could lead to a better understanding of where to strategically locate additional signals at other railroad crossings in order to better warn drivers of an approaching train, particularly when visibility is hindered by heavy rain, fog, or at night.
• Does the case offer a new direction in future research? A case study can be used as a tool for exploratory research that points to a need for further examination of the research problem. A case can be used when there are few studies that help predict an outcome or that establish a clear understanding about how best to proceed in addressing a problem. For example, after conducting a thorough literature review [very important!], you discover that little research exists showing the ways in which women contribute to promoting water conservation in rural communities of Uganda. A case study of how women contribute to saving water in a particular village can lay the foundation for understanding the need for more thorough research that documents how women in their roles as cooks and family caregivers think about water as a valuable resource within their community throughout rural regions of east Africa. The case could also point to the need for scholars to apply feminist theories of work and family to the issue of water conservation.

Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. “Building Theories from Case Study Research.” Academy of Management Review 14 (October 1989): 532-550; Emmel, Nick. Sampling and Choosing Cases in Qualitative Research: A Realist Approach . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2013; Gerring, John. “What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for?” American Political Science Review 98 (May 2004): 341-354; Mills, Albert J. , Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010; Seawright, Jason and John Gerring. "Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research." Political Research Quarterly 61 (June 2008): 294-308.

Structure and Writing Style

The purpose of a paper in the social sciences designed around a case study is to thoroughly investigate a subject of analysis in order to reveal a new understanding about the research problem and, in so doing, contributing new knowledge to what is already known from previous studies. In applied social sciences disciplines [e.g., education, social work, public administration, etc.], case studies may also be used to reveal best practices, highlight key programs, or investigate interesting aspects of professional work. In general, the structure of a case study research paper is not all that different from a standard college-level research paper. However, there are subtle differences you should be aware of. Here are the key elements to organizing and writing a case study research paper.

I.  Introduction

As with any research paper, your introduction should serve as a roadmap for your readers to ascertain the scope and purpose of your study . The introduction to a case study research paper, however, should not only describe the research problem and its significance, but you should also succinctly describe why the case is being used and how it relates to addressing the problem. The two elements should be linked. With this in mind, a good introduction answers these four questions:

• What was I studying? Describe the research problem and describe the subject of analysis you have chosen to address the problem. Explain how they are linked and what elements of the case will help to expand knowledge and understanding about the problem.
• Why was this topic important to investigate? Describe the significance of the research problem and state why a case study design and the subject of analysis that the paper is designed around is appropriate in addressing the problem.
• What did we know about this topic before I did this study? Provide background that helps lead the reader into the more in-depth literature review to follow. If applicable, summarize prior case study research applied to the research problem and why it fails to adequately address the research problem. Describe why your case will be useful. If no prior case studies have been used to address the research problem, explain why you have selected this subject of analysis.
• How will this study advance new knowledge or new ways of understanding? Explain why your case study will be suitable in helping to expand knowledge and understanding about the research problem.

Each of these questions should be addressed in no more than a few paragraphs. Exceptions to this can be when you are addressing a complex research problem or subject of analysis that requires more in-depth background information.

II.  Literature Review

The literature review for a case study research paper is generally structured the same as it is for any college-level research paper. The difference, however, is that the literature review is focused on providing background information and  enabling historical interpretation of the subject of analysis in relation to the research problem the case is intended to address . This includes synthesizing studies that help to:

• Place relevant works in the context of their contribution to understanding the case study being investigated . This would include summarizing studies that have used a similar subject of analysis to investigate the research problem. If there is literature using the same or a very similar case to study, you need to explain why duplicating past research is important [e.g., conditions have changed; prior studies were conducted long ago, etc.].
• Describe the relationship each work has to the others under consideration that informs the reader why this case is applicable . Your literature review should include a description of any works that support using the case to study the research problem and the underlying research questions.
• Identify new ways to interpret prior research using the case study . If applicable, review any research that has examined the research problem using a different research design. Explain how your case study design may reveal new knowledge or a new perspective or that can redirect research in an important new direction.
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies . This refers to synthesizing any literature that points to unresolved issues of concern about the research problem and describing how the subject of analysis that forms the case study can help resolve these existing contradictions.
• Point the way in fulfilling a need for additional research . Your review should examine any literature that lays a foundation for understanding why your case study design and the subject of analysis around which you have designed your study may reveal a new way of approaching the research problem or offer a perspective that points to the need for additional research.
• Expose any gaps that exist in the literature that the case study could help to fill . Summarize any literature that not only shows how your subject of analysis contributes to understanding the research problem, but how your case contributes to a new way of understanding the problem that prior research has failed to do.
• Locate your own research within the context of existing literature [very important!] . Collectively, your literature review should always place your case study within the larger domain of prior research about the problem. The overarching purpose of reviewing pertinent literature in a case study paper is to demonstrate that you have thoroughly identified and synthesized prior studies in the context of explaining the relevance of the case in addressing the research problem.

III.  Method

In this section, you explain why you selected a particular subject of analysis to study and the strategy you used to identify and ultimately decide that your case was appropriate in addressing the research problem. The way you describe the methods used varies depending on the type of subject of analysis that frames your case study.

If your subject of analysis is an incident or event . In the social and behavioral sciences, the event or incident that represents the case to be studied is usually bounded by time and place, with a clear beginning and end and with an identifiable location or position relative to its surroundings. The subject of analysis can be a rare or critical event or it can focus on a typical or regular event. The purpose of studying a rare event is to illuminate new ways of thinking about the broader research problem or to test a hypothesis. Critical incident case studies must describe the method by which you identified the event and explain the process by which you determined the validity of this case to inform broader perspectives about the research problem or to reveal new findings. However, the event does not have to be a rare or uniquely significant to support new thinking about the research problem or to challenge an existing hypothesis. For example, Walo, Bull, and Breen conducted a case study to identify and evaluate the direct and indirect economic benefits and costs of a local sports event in the City of Lismore, New South Wales, Australia. The purpose of their study was to provide new insights from measuring the impact of a typical local sports event that prior studies could not measure well because they focused on large "mega-events." Whether the event is rare or not, the methods section should include an explanation of the following characteristics of the event: a) when did it take place; b) what were the underlying circumstances leading to the event; c) what were the consequences of the event.

If your subject of analysis is a person. Explain why you selected this particular individual to be studied and describe what experience he or she has had that provides an opportunity to advance new understandings about the research problem. Mention any background about this person which might help the reader understand the significance of his/her experiences that make them worthy of study. This includes describing the relationships this person has had with other people, institutions, and/or events that support using him or her as the subject for a case study research paper. It is particularly important to differentiate the person as the subject of analysis from others and to succinctly explain how the person relates to examining the research problem.

If your subject of analysis is a place. In general, a case study that investigates a place suggests a subject of analysis that is unique or special in some way and that this uniqueness can be used to build new understanding or knowledge about the research problem. A case study of a place must not only describe its various attributes relevant to the research problem [e.g., physical, social, cultural, economic, political, etc.], but you must state the method by which you determined that this place will illuminate new understandings about the research problem. It is also important to articulate why a particular place as the case for study is being used if similar places also exist [i.e., if you are studying patterns of homeless encampments of veterans in open spaces, why study Echo Park in Los Angeles rather than Griffith Park?]. If applicable, describe what type of human activity involving this place makes it a good choice to study [e.g., prior research reveals Echo Park has more homeless veterans].

If your subject of analysis is a phenomenon. A phenomenon refers to a fact, occurrence, or circumstance that can be studied or observed but with the cause or explanation to be in question. In this sense, a phenomenon that forms your subject of analysis can encompass anything that can be observed or presumed to exist but is not fully understood. In the social and behavioral sciences, the case usually focuses on human interaction within a complex physical, social, economic, cultural, or political system. For example, the phenomenon could be the observation that many vehicles used by ISIS fighters are small trucks with English language advertisements on them. The research problem could be that ISIS fighters are difficult to combat because they are highly mobile. The research questions could be how and by what means are these vehicles used by ISIS being supplied to the militants and how might supply lines to these vehicles be cut? How might knowing the suppliers of these trucks from overseas reveal larger networks of collaborators and financial support? A case study of a phenomenon most often encompasses an in-depth analysis of a cause and effect that is grounded in an interactive relationship between people and their environment in some way.

NOTE:   The choice of the case or set of cases to study cannot appear random. Evidence that supports the method by which you identified and chose your subject of analysis should be linked to the findings from the literature review. Be sure to cite any prior studies that helped you determine that the case you chose was appropriate for investigating the research problem.

IV.  Discussion

The main elements of your discussion section are generally the same as any research paper, but centered around interpreting and drawing conclusions about the key findings from your case study. Note that a general social sciences research paper may contain a separate section to report findings. However, in a paper designed around a case study, it is more common to combine a description of the findings with the discussion about their implications. The objectives of your discussion section should include the following:

Reiterate the Research Problem/State the Major Findings Briefly reiterate the research problem you are investigating and explain why the subject of analysis around which you designed the case study were used. You should then describe the findings revealed from your study of the case using direct, declarative, and succinct proclamation of the study results. Highlight any findings that were unexpected or especially profound.

Explain the Meaning of the Findings and Why They are Important Systematically explain the meaning of your case study findings and why you believe they are important. Begin this part of the section by repeating what you consider to be your most important or surprising finding first, then systematically review each finding. Be sure to thoroughly extrapolate what your analysis of the case can tell the reader about situations or conditions beyond the actual case that was studied while, at the same time, being careful not to misconstrue or conflate a finding that undermines the external validity of your conclusions.

Relate the Findings to Similar Studies No study in the social sciences is so novel or possesses such a restricted focus that it has absolutely no relation to previously published research. The discussion section should relate your case study results to those found in other studies, particularly if questions raised from prior studies served as the motivation for choosing your subject of analysis. This is important because comparing and contrasting the findings of other studies helps to support the overall importance of your results and it highlights how and in what ways your case study design and the subject of analysis differs from prior research about the topic.

Consider Alternative Explanations of the Findings It is important to remember that the purpose of social science research is to discover and not to prove. When writing the discussion section, you should carefully consider all possible explanations for the case study results, rather than just those that fit your hypothesis or prior assumptions and biases. Be alert to what the in-depth analysis of the case may reveal about the research problem, including offering a contrarian perspective to what scholars have stated in prior research.

Acknowledge the Study's Limitations You can state the study's limitations in the conclusion section of your paper but describing the limitations of your subject of analysis in the discussion section provides an opportunity to identify the limitations and explain why they are not significant. This part of the discussion section should also note any unanswered questions or issues your case study could not address. More detailed information about how to document any limitations to your research can be found here .

Suggest Areas for Further Research Although your case study may offer important insights about the research problem, there are likely additional questions related to the problem that remain unanswered or findings that unexpectedly revealed themselves as a result of your in-depth analysis of the case. Be sure that the recommendations for further research are linked to the research problem and that you explain why your recommendations are valid in other contexts and based on the original assumptions of your study.

V.  Conclusion

As with any research paper, you should summarize your conclusion in clear, simple language; emphasize how the findings from your case study differs from or supports prior research and why. Do not simply reiterate the discussion section. Provide a synthesis of key findings presented in the paper to show how these converge to address the research problem. If you haven't already done so in the discussion section, be sure to document the limitations of your case study and needs for further research.

The function of your paper's conclusion is to: 1)  restate the main argument supported by the findings from the analysis of your case; 2) clearly state the context, background, and necessity of pursuing the research problem using a case study design in relation to an issue, controversy, or a gap found from reviewing the literature; and, 3) provide a place for you to persuasively and succinctly restate the significance of your research problem, given that the reader has now been presented with in-depth information about the topic.

Consider the following points to help ensure your conclusion is appropriate:

• If the argument or purpose of your paper is complex, you may need to summarize these points for your reader.
• If prior to your conclusion, you have not yet explained the significance of your findings or if you are proceeding inductively, use the conclusion of your paper to describe your main points and explain their significance.
• Move from a detailed to a general level of consideration of the case study's findings that returns the topic to the context provided by the introduction or within a new context that emerges from your case study findings.

Note that, depending on the discipline you are writing in and your professor's preferences, the concluding paragraph may contain your final reflections on the evidence presented applied to practice or on the essay's central research problem. However, the nature of being introspective about the subject of analysis you have investigated will depend on whether you are explicitly asked to express your observations in this way.

Problems to Avoid

Overgeneralization One of the goals of a case study is to lay a foundation for understanding broader trends and issues applied to similar circumstances. However, be careful when drawing conclusions from your case study. They must be evidence-based and grounded in the results of the study; otherwise, it is merely speculation. Looking at a prior example, it would be incorrect to state that a factor in improving girls access to education in Azerbaijan and the policy implications this may have for improving access in other Muslim nations is due to girls access to social media if there is no documentary evidence from your case study to indicate this. There may be anecdotal evidence that retention rates were better for girls who were on social media, but this observation would only point to the need for further research and would not be a definitive finding if this was not a part of your original research agenda.

Failure to Document Limitations No case is going to reveal all that needs to be understood about a research problem. Therefore, just as you have to clearly state the limitations of a general research study , you must describe the specific limitations inherent in the subject of analysis. For example, the case of studying how women conceptualize the need for water conservation in a village in Uganda could have limited application in other cultural contexts or in areas where fresh water from rivers or lakes is plentiful and, therefore, conservation is understood differently than preserving access to a scarce resource.

Failure to Extrapolate All Possible Implications Just as you don't want to over-generalize from your case study findings, you also have to be thorough in the consideration of all possible outcomes or recommendations derived from your findings. If you do not, your reader may question the validity of your analysis, particularly if you failed to document an obvious outcome from your case study research. For example, in the case of studying the accident at the railroad crossing to evaluate where and what types of warning signals should be located, you failed to take into consideration speed limit signage as well as warning signals. When designing your case study, be sure you have thoroughly addressed all aspects of the problem and do not leave gaps in your analysis.

Case Studies . Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Gerring, John. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices . New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007; Merriam, Sharan B. Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education . Rev. ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1998; Miller, Lisa L. “The Use of Case Studies in Law and Social Science Research.” Annual Review of Law and Social Science 14 (2018): TBD; Mills, Albert J., Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010; Putney, LeAnn Grogan. "Case Study." In Encyclopedia of Research Design , Neil J. Salkind, editor. (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010), pp. 116-120; Simons, Helen. Case Study Research in Practice . London: SAGE Publications, 2009;  Kratochwill,  Thomas R. and Joel R. Levin, editors. Single-Case Research Design and Analysis: New Development for Psychology and Education .  Hilldsale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992; Swanborn, Peter G. Case Study Research: What, Why and How? London : SAGE, 2010; Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods . 6th edition. Los Angeles, CA, SAGE Publications, 2014; Walo, Maree, Adrian Bull, and Helen Breen. “Achieving Economic Benefits at Local Events: A Case Study of a Local Sports Event.” Festival Management and Event Tourism 4 (1996): 95-106.

Writing Tip

At Least Five Misconceptions about Case Study Research

Social science case studies are often perceived as limited in their ability to create new knowledge because they are not randomly selected and findings cannot be generalized to larger populations. Flyvbjerg examines five misunderstandings about case study research and systematically "corrects" each one. To quote, these are:

Misunderstanding 1 :  General, theoretical [context-independent knowledge is more valuable than concrete, practical (context-dependent) knowledge. Misunderstanding 2 :  One cannot generalize on the basis of an individual case; therefore, the case study cannot contribute to scientific development. Misunderstanding 3 :  The case study is most useful for generating hypotheses; that is, in the first stage of a total research process, whereas other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building. Misunderstanding 4 :  The case study contains a bias toward verification, that is, a tendency to confirm the researcher’s preconceived notions. Misunderstanding 5 :  It is often difficult to summarize and develop general propositions and theories on the basis of specific case studies [p. 221].

While writing your paper, think introspectively about how you addressed these misconceptions because to do so can help you strengthen the validity and reliability of your research by clarifying issues of case selection, the testing and challenging of existing assumptions, the interpretation of key findings, and the summation of case outcomes. Think of a case study research paper as a complete, in-depth narrative about the specific properties and key characteristics of your subject of analysis applied to the research problem.

Flyvbjerg, Bent. “Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 12 (April 2006): 219-245.

• << Previous: Reviewing Collected Essays
• Next: Writing a Field Report >>
• Last Updated: Jan 17, 2023 10:50 AM
• URL: https://libguides.pointloma.edu/ResearchPaper

• Open access
• Published: 21 October 2024

Medical student use of practice questions in their studies: a qualitative study

• Ryan Sheehy   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2435-7234 1 ,
• Devin Scott   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0002-3670-0589 2 ,
• Diveena Davis 3 ,
• Marissa Roffler   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3055-7999 4 ,
• Trevor Sweatman 5 &
• Eric Nemec   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7794-6732 6  

BMC Medical Education volume  24 , Article number:  1181 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

165 Accesses

Metrics details

Practice questions are highly sought out for use as a study tool among medical students in undergraduate medical education. At the same time, it remains unknown how medical students use and incorporate practice questions and their rationales into their studies. To explore this heavily relied upon study strategy, semi-structured interviews were conducted with second-year medical students to assess how they approach using practice questions. Qualitative thematic analysis revealed several recurrent themes: (1) Medical students use practice questions for primary learning, (2) Medical students place more importance on the rationale of a practice question versus selecting the right answer, and (3) Medical students view practice questions as being designed to be used once or having a single-use. Together, these themes provide insight into how medical students use practice questions to study, which may guide medical educators in their creation of practice questions with appropriate rationales and provide foundational data for future mixed methods analyses seeking to generalize these findings.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

At the heart of a professional school is the aim to produce competent professionals. Graduates must not only possess the knowledge of their field but also the ability to correctly apply it. Society expects a licensed clinician to be competent in their craft [ 1 ]. A successful clinician draws on basic science knowledge to inform diagnostic and therapeutic decisions to produce the best possible outcomes for their patients [ 2 , 3 , 4 ]. As adult learners of the basic sciences, medical students prefer to orient themselves through a problem-based approach rather than a subject-centered approach [ 5 , 6 ]. One specific strategy is using online quizzes for self-assessment [ 7 ]. A qualitative study exploring how medical students perceive basic science relevance to clinical rotations found that students relate basic science knowledge to their professional identity and their adaptive expertise [ 2 ]. At the beginning of their careers as medical students, these soon-to-be professionals face the daunting task of mastering an ever-widening body of medical knowledge [ 8 ]. To overcome this hurdle, they rely on many resources to facilitate learning, including the curriculum of their medical school, mentors, fellow medical students, clinical experience, and extracurricular resources such as board preparation materials and practice question banks [ 9 ].

In the United States, medical students are uniquely driven to compete to successfully match as residents after graduation from medical school. Specific use of competitive learning techniques has enhanced learning outcomes in this group [ 10 ]. This competitive drive fuels a strong desire among medical students to streamline their learning to maximize their most precious resource, time. Medical students that successfully manage their time minimize their risk of burnout [ 11 ] and increase their opportunities to pursue extracurricular activities. The desire to streamline learning and best manage their time leads some medical students to shift their learning to electronic resources created within or found outside of the medical school curriculum [ 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ]. Many of these resources prioritize completing practice questions and committing concepts to memory. Practice questions most often take the form of a single best answer or multiple-choice style question. Completion of practice questions by medical students has been found to be a strong predictor of academic outcomes such as exam performance, course grades, and scores on board exams [ 16 , 17 , 18 ]. A post-exam survey completed by medical students found that a majority of students used 6–8 outside resources in exam preparation [ 19 ]. Contrary to the goal of producing competent professionals, the competitive environment of medical school can prompt a medical student to prioritize a memorization study technique for short-term gain at the detriment to long-term retention and understanding of the material.

Practice questions can be used for short-term gain and long-term material retention. The use of practice questions is a popular study technique among medical students [ 20 ]. Students utilize practice questions as a study technique with great frequency, especially in times of stress and anxiety [ 18 , 21 ]. Practice questions are an excellent way for a student to use retrieval practice to enhance their long-term retention of the material versus repeated studying [ 22 ]. However, practice questions can also be misused if they are used solely for learning rather than self-assessment. Students who used practice questions as a primary source of learning rather than for self-assessment had worse assessment outcomes [ 23 ]. There is a gap in understanding how medical students use practice questions as a study resource.

Despite the high demand and use of practice questions among medical students [ 20 , 21 , 24 , 25 ], little is known about how medical students use practice questions and their rationales in their study process. Rationales are defined as an explanation as to why the correct answer is correct and why the incorrect answers are incorrect. This qualitative research study aims to determine how medical students use practice questions as a study resource. Significant insight into this process has the potential to increase understanding of effective practices for using practice questions to enhance learning outcomes in medical education.

Materials and methods

Study design and sample.

This qualitative research study centered around semi-structured, individual interviews with second-year medical students within the College of Medicine (COM) at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center (UTHSC). The medical degree, Doctor of Medicine (MD), within the COM at UTHSC is a 4-year undergraduate medical education program. Medical students at UTHSC have access to practice questions from a variety of sources. Students have access to faculty generated questions that are posted in the form of a quiz to the learning management system (LMS). Students also have access to questions through a third-party resource called USMLE-Rx (Louisville, KY). Some students purchase access to additional third-party practice question sources. Questions from these sources vary in difficulty. Some can be fact recall, some can be higher order questions, and some integrate multiple disciplines. Faculty generated practice questions attempt to mimic the difficulty of the faculty generated questions that make up the course exams. Recruitment for the study began in the late Spring. In the UTHSC COM curriculum, first year students are still in pre-clinical courses in the late Spring, whereas second year students have taken the Step 1 United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) and progressed to clerkships. At this stage of the curriculum at the UTHSC COM there are no true second year students. Recruitment of students to participate in the study continued over the Summer and into the Fall semester. Students that had or were being interviewed for this study were in the second-year cohort. Frist year students were not added to be recruited for this study as the authors had a greater interest in how medical students used practice questions to study during the pre-clinical curriculum. At the beginning of the Fall semester, first-year students had been exposed to a limited amount of the pre-clinical curriculum and would more than likely answer interview questions based on their educational experiences prior to medical school. First year medical students were excluded from the study as including them may have introduced confounding variables from their prior training that could have obfuscated the findings. Second-year medical students were the primary focus over more senior medical students, as there was greater interest amongst the authors in how medical students used practice questions to study during the pre-clinical curriculum. Medical students interviewed were beginning their second year of study and likely possessed a successful study routine due to passing their first-year courses. To identify potential research participants, an email was sent through the class email distribution list to recruit students from the entire second-year class. For participating in the study, research participants were provided with a free coffee thermos. Medical students that were a part of the three-year MD program cohort were excluded from the study. Sampling and recruitment were stopped once thematic saturation was reached. In total, ten interviews were conducted and included in qualitative thematic analysis. The class contains 180 students. Therefore, 5.5% of the class was interviewed. To protect the confidentiality of our research participants, demographic characteristics of research participants were not collected. Interview questions focused primarily on the research question. Ethical approval for this research study was obtained from the IRB at UTHSC and the Homewood IRB at Johns Hopkins University. The consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) was consulted as a checklist for reporting this research [ 26 ]. A completed COREQ checklist is included in the supplemental section.

Data collection

The interview guide used in this study was developed for this study. The interview guide included the following questions: (1) How do you use practice questions and their rationales in your studies?(2) Do you always use practice questions this way, or does it change based on other factors? (3) [after being handed a sample practice question (appendix 1 )] Can you talk me through how you use this practice question to study? Clarifying questions included: (1) Can you explain that to me? (2) Can you tell me more about that? One investigator (D.S.) conducted the interviews. D.S. is not associated with the COM at UTHSC; he is an Instructional Consultant, with a PhD in Communications, housed within the UTHSC campus Teaching and Learning Center. D.S. conducted and recorded the interviews anonymously using the Zoom platform. Zoom was also used to generate initial transcripts of the interviews. A different member of the research team (D.D.) edited, updated, and confirmed these transcripts using the audio-video recordings of the interviews. D.D. is a member of the staff within the Office of Medical Education within the COM at UTHSC. To preserve anonymity of the research participants, all names and personal identifiers were removed prior to qualitative thematic analysis. Prior to the initiation of the interview, a brief informed consent statement was presented orally to research subjects. A research subject’s willingness to participate in the study constituted documentation to their consent. In an attempt to avoid potential bias, the principal investigator (R.S.) was not disclosed to be a part of the research study prior to initiation of interviews. R.S. served as the Assistant Dean of the Pre-Clinical Curriculum within the COM at UTHSC. R.S. was revealed to be the principal investigator of the study to the research participants once saturation was reached and data collection ceased.

Data analysis

Transcripts from the first ten interviews were used to build initial codes for qualitative thematic analysis. Impactful text segments and quotations that stood on their own formed the basis of analysis [ 27 ]. R.S. and D.S. independently determined codes and sub-codes after individually reading through the interview transcripts. Deidentified interview transcripts were hand-coded after being uploaded into a qualitative analysis software, Dedoose ® (Manhattan Beach, CA, USA). Dedoose aided in generating initial codes and in developing and reviewing themes. D.S. uses qualitative methods as a part of his scholarship and has a background in qualitative methods from his PhD training. D.S. viewed the data through the lens of an instructional consultant and his interactions with faculty at UTHSC. R.S. also has a background in qualitative methods from his Master of Education in the Health Professions (MEHP) degree. R.S. viewed this data through the lens of a teaching faculty member within the pre-clinical curriculum and as an academic administrator. After an initial analysis D.S. and R.S. met to share findings and to reconcile a single set of codes. A third analyst (M.R.) also reviewed the transcripts independently and acted as a tiebreaker during this reconciliation process. M.R. is a psychology professor and has a background in cognition and qualitative methods in her Experimental Psychology PhD training. M.R. viewed this data through the lens of an educator and as an experienced qualitative researcher. Interview transcripts were again read by D.S. and R.S. to develop themes independently. The qualitative data from the interview transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis to determine patterns of meaning [ 28 ]. M.R. again acted as a tiebreaker as all three data analysts agreed on themes. At this time, sampling ceased due to the saturation and appearance of similar codes and repeated themes in the analyzed transcripts [ 29 , 30 ]. Reported here are the thematic qualitative findings with corresponding representative quotations.

All interviewees were familiar with the use of practice questions and their rationales as a study strategy in medical school. Identified themes center on how second-year medical students use practice questions to learn, the identification of the rationale as the most important part of the practice question, and how practice questions are perceived as being designed to be used once or having a single-use as a study tool.

Using practice questions to learn

Medical students use practice questions for self-assessment; however, the timing of their use in proximity to an exam and student reliance on practice questions during dense sections of the curriculum suggests they also use them for memorization and primary learning. Dense courses in medical school are defined as those that cover topics not typically encountered at the undergraduate level, including pharmacology and pathology, over a condensed period.

One participant stated their heavy use of practice questions in a dense course that takes place in the Spring of their first year of training as follows:

There was just so much information and so I used practice questions more regularly throughout the block rather than just concentrating at the end. Just because it was just a lot and that was a good way for me to quickly understand it and get it in my mind.

Another participant agreed when they stated:

Yeah. Probably when we did our CMOD [Common Mechanisms of Disease] block , there was common mechanisms of disease. There was just so much information and so I used practice questions more regularly throughout the block rather than just concentrating at the end.

This same participant went on to describe how they used practice questions early on in medical school:

Something like Anatomy ,  which was our first semester , I used to do just five questions a day on Grey’s Anatomy book. It doesn’t matter if I actually know the questions. Because that way , it can actually help me to think through it. That was like first semester , which I just barely started medical school.

Confidence played a role for one participant as they declared, “I think depending on how I’m feeling. If I feel less confident about something, then I will do more practice questions. If I feel pretty confident, then I will not.” When asked if the participants felt like practice questions were an effective use of their time for studying, one participant replied, “I think it’s probably the most effective use of your time. I think almost all medical students will use practice questions exclusively for the last couple years.”

Importance of practice question rationales

Medical students place more emphasis on the rationales and determining the reasoning of why correct answers are correct and why incorrect answers are incorrect than they do on selecting the right answer choice and using test-wise skills to come to a correct answer prior to looking at the rationale.

One participant disclosed this about practice question rationales:

Rationales are the most important ones because – I don’t think it’s a matter of just getting one question right especially in practice. I think what matters is organizing and then making sure my thinking process is correct. And then so something like , I have this thinking process. And then most of the time I confirm whether this is the right thinking process and when rationales are not good - I can’t confirm what changed.

Another participant discussed the importance of rationales and their differing use based on timing. They stated:

Probably 3 , 4 , 5 days before the exam , I’m looking at rationales pretty closely. The day before the exam , I’m not really looking at - it’s more like getting quick – I’m trying not to like study things super in depth the day before the exam because I’m just trying to see a lot of things. So [it’s] more about consolidating those details. I guess I’m not really sure. The rationales 5 , 6 days before the exam…rationales really helped me figure out , what are the high points of things that won’t take me a long time to study but that if I can just review them quickly , they’ll add a handful of extra points to my total , you know. Things that I can clarify right now for the next 10 min , and then I’m solid on it for the exam.

When given an actual practice question, one participant shared their process for using the practice question and rationale:

For this , I would probably – just because this one I’m not really sure – I would probably not answer the question and then review the material and then come back to it because I feel like if I were to just randomly guess and then look at the rationale ,  it’s just kind of a waste of an opportunity to actually check myself and sometimes practice questions are harder to find. There’s certain subjects that maybe there’s a ton ,  and I’d be less concerned about that then , but still just kind of a waste of my time , I think.

In relation to determining the reasoning of the practice question rationale, one participant asserted, “So a lot of the times when using the rationale for why something is incorrect, I like to kind of rewire my understanding of something and make sure I understand this is why you should rule out this answer.”

Practice questions as single-use study tools

Another emergent theme was that medical students interviewed did not use retrieval practice with their use of practice questions as medical students view practice questions as being designed to be used once as a study tool.

When a participant was asked about their use of practice questions and their reusability, they stated:

I like to say I do , but I typically…I don’t , like I should , but I don’t. Because I’ve tried that and what happens is I end up just knowing the answers based on previous questions. So , if I had more questions , that will be better.

When asked about reviewing a single practice question multiple times, one participant stated:

If I get it right , I typically don’t review them. If I get it wrong , I might. It depends , because usually I do practice questions in sections right. So , if it’s a test on eMedley [learning management system] …if I get like a core percentage on the overall then I’ll do that again like maybe the next day or a couple days later. But if I did pretty good overall then I just won’t look at the practice questions again.

Some participants stated that they use practice questions to guide future studies using the flashcard program Anki. If a knowledge gap was identified after reading the rationale of the question or if the participant selected the wrong answer, they would go back to find Anki flashcard decks or make their own flashcards to review the topic.

One participant specifically described this process:

I usually make flashcards based on the questions , based on the main ideas so I can remember it down the line… So , I would either find premade ones already related to the topic or make one specifically for the portion I missed… I basically read the explanation and try to find cards or make my own notes on aspects that I missed , always the facts that the explanations give.

Practice questions can be used for short-term gain, long-term material retention, and are a popular study technique among medical students [ 20 ]. The findings of this qualitative study indicate that the way medical students who participated in interviews use practice questions in their studies differ based on the density of the learning topic or differences in learning goals. Thematic analysis of interviews with second-year medical students suggests that while medical students use practice questions for self-assessment, the timing of when medical students use practice questions in relation to exams and medical student reliance on practice questions in dense courses indicates that medical students often use practice questions both for review and for primary learning. The finding that multiple medical students described only using practice questions to study immediately before the exam and how they place more emphasis on the rationale versus the question itself supports the conclusion that students use practice questions for both primary learning and self-assessment. Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) is a theoretical framework that suggests that learners have a limited working memory capacity that can be easily overloaded with new information [ 31 ]. This theory divides cognitive load into three types: intrinsic (the complexity of the subject matter), extraneous (the way information is presented to the learner), and germane (the work put into creating a permanent store of knowledge). Given the preference to use practice questions immediately before an exam, it would be reasonable to conclude that they can help reduce extraneous cognitive load by guiding learners to focus on the essential elements of the material. By engaging with practice questions, learners are actively processing information, organizing it into coherent structures, and integrating it with their prior knowledge, thereby reducing germane load. This process helps in forming deeper understandings and long-term retention of the material; however, again, given the proximity to the exam, it’s questionable if this practice allows for retention in working memory versus long-term memory. Last, considering exam preparation, practice questions may also help manage the intrinsic cognitive load by breaking down complex information into smaller, more manageable parts.

Multiple medical students indicated that they used Anki for retrieval practice; however, medical students tended to view practice questions as having a single-use. This indicates that medical students may not be using practice questions as faculty intend them to be used multiple times as a tool for self-assessment. Practice questions allow students to actively recall learned information and use retrieval practice to enhance their long-term retention of the material versus repeated studying [ 22 ]. CLT would posit that a better use of practice questions could perhaps be incremental, where learners can gradually build up their understanding over time without overwhelming their working memory. However, medical students may not use practice questions optimally if they are used for primary learning rather than self-assessment. Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) theory in medical education emphasizes the importance of learners’ active control over their own learning processes [ 32 ]. It involves setting goals and monitoring and regulating cognition, motivation, and behavior toward achieving those goals. Practice questions have a significant role in SRL by helping students set goals, monitor, and regulate their learning, reflect on their performance, stay motivated, build self-efficacy, adapt to new information, manage their time effectively, and develop resilience. Students reported preference for using practice questions for primary learning may assist students in feeling they’ve achieved their own goals by completing a certain number or a complete section of practice questions.

Constructivism posits that learners construct their own understanding and knowledge of the world, through experiencing things and reflecting on those experiences [ 33 ]. In medical education, the constructivist approach can be particularly useful because it mirrors the way medical practitioners encounter and solve problems in the real world. Construction of knowledge occurs on already existing knowledge. Anki has substantial question banks, which makes it an appealing application to allow students to check their knowledge [ 34 ]. However, using questions to construct new knowledge seems inefficient. Similarly, the repeated use of practice questions would help in developing and refining schemas for medical knowledge; however, we were surprised to see that students considered them one use only.

Students who used practice questions for self-assessment rather than as a primary source of learning had better assessment outcomes [ 23 ]. Self-assessments that use practice questions should be thoughtfully inserted, in regard to timing and availability, into the curriculum to optimize their ability to promote learning and to best take advantage of adult learning theory [ 7 , 35 ]. The results of this study suggest that the ways in which medical students use practice questions may not maximize the capacity of the practice question to best enhance their learning outcomes.

Limitations and future directions

Future mixed methods studies should focus on generalizing findings from this thematic qualitative analysis and exploring new connections between existing quantitative data sets. The themes generated in this study can be used to craft a class-wide medical student survey or to expand research to multiple medical student populations from different institutions to test these findings and to assess generalizability. Additionally, comparing the qualitative findings reported here with quantitative data from a learning management system (LMS) may provide additional insights into practice question use by medical students. LMS data would allow for reliable quantitative information on how medical students use practice questions by giving insight into the number of practice questions completed, time spent on individual practice questions, time spent on practice question quizzes, the number of times a student completes the same practice question, and the time between quiz access and a unit exam. Artificial intelligence (AI) may also play a role in future studies due to ease of access and its ability to generate practice questions [ 36 ]. There are several limitations that must be acknowledged with this study. A pilot study at a single institution limits its generalizability; however, given this is the first attempt that authors know of to quantify these data, it still serves an important, hypothesis-generating purpose for future studies. It remains to be determined how generalizable this finding is in the greater medical student population; another limitation to the study is a self-selection bias. Similar findings were seen in another study where medical students were found to highly utilize practice questions as a study technique, especially in times of stress and anxiety [ 21 ]. While the authors took great care in our methodology using individual thematic analysis of faculty at two different institutions, there remains the possibility of subjectivity whereby our own experiences might have influenced the identified themes [ 37 ].

Significant insight into the ways in which current medical students use practice questions has the potential to increase understanding of how best to integrate practice questions within coursework and curricula to enhance learning outcomes in undergraduate medical education. Identified uses do not consistently align with what could be expected from established learning theories. Investigating medical student study utilization of practice questions in their studies may allow for the future blending of techniques students already use with best teaching and learning practices to create a new practice question platform to optimize medical student satisfaction and learning outcomes.

Data availability

Select quotes supporting the qualitative thematic analysis are provided within the manuscript. Full transcripts are included as supplementary information files.

Cruess SR. Professionalism and medicine’s social contract with society. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;449:170–6.

Article   Google Scholar  

Dickinson BL, Gibson K, VanDerKolk K, Greene J, Rosu CA, Navedo DD, et al. It is this very knowledge that makes us doctors: an applied thematic analysis of how medical students perceive the relevance of biomedical science knowledge to clinical medicine. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20(1):356.

Woods NN, Brooks LR, Norman GR. The role of biomedical knowledge in diagnosis of difficult clinical cases. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2007;12(4):417.

Woods NN. Science is fundamental: the role of biomedical knowledge in clinical reasoning. Med Educ. 2007;41(12):1173–7.

Knowles M. The modern practice of adult education: from pedagogy to andragogy. 2 ed. New York: Cambridge Books; 1980.

Google Scholar  

Merriam S, Bierema L. Adult learning: linking theory and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2014.

Reed S, Shell R, Kassis K, Tartaglia K, Wallihan R, Smith K, et al. Applying adult learning practices in medical education. Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care. 2014;44(6):170–81.

Densen P. Challenges and opportunities facing medical education. Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc. 2011;122:48–58.

Ronner L, Linkowski L. Online forums and the step 1 climate: perspectives from a Medical Student Reddit user. Acad Med. 2020;95(9):1329–31.

Corell A, Regueras LM, Verdu E, Verdú MJ, de Castro JP. Effects of competitive learning tools on medical students: a case study. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(3).

Dunn LB, Iglewicz A, Moutier C. A conceptual model of Medical Student Well-Being: promoting resilience and preventing burnout. Acad Psychiatry. 2008;32(1):44–53.

Ellaway R, Masters K. AMEE Guide 32: e-Learning in medical education part 1: learning, teaching and assessment. Med Teach. 2008;30(5):455–73.

Haq R, Li B, Jovicic A, Dastur D, Trinkaus M, Kong A. Web-based Oncology Educational Tool for Medical Trainees on Oncology Rotation-results of a pilot study. J Cancer Educ. 2018;33(4):788–97.

Lewis PJ, Chen JY, Lin DJ, McNulty NJ. Radiology ExamWeb: development and implementation of a national web-based examination system for medical students in radiology. Acad Radiol. 2013;20(3):290–6.

Roffler M, Sheehy R. Self-reported learning and study strategies in First and Second Year Medical Students. Med Sci Educ. 2022;32(2):329–35.

Baños JH, Pepin ME, Van Wagoner N. Class-wide access to a commercial step 1 question bank during preclinical organ-based modules: a pilot project. Acad Med. 2018;93(3):486–90.

Bonasso P, Lucke-Wold B 3rd, Reed Z, Bozek J, Cottrell S. Investigating the impact of preparation strategies on USMLE Step 1 performance. MedEdPublish. 2015;4(1).

Kortz MW, Kongs BM, Bisesi DR, Roffler M, Sheehy RM. A retrospective and correlative analysis of academic and nonacademic predictors of COMLEX level 1 performance. J Osteopath Med. 2022.

Bauzon J, Alver A, Ravikumar V, Devera A, Mikhael T, Nauman R, et al. The impact of Educational resources and Perceived preparedness on Medical Education performance. Med Sci Educ. 2021;31(4):1319–26.

Briscoe GW, Fore-Arcand L, Levine RE, Carlson DL, Spollen JJ, Pelic C, et al. Psychiatry clerkship students’ preparation, reflection, and results on the NBME psychiatry subject exam. Acad Psychiatry. 2009;33(2):120–4.

Yavner SD. Stress, fatigue, and medical students’ study resource selection: implications for the design of educational multimedia. Education, and Human Development: New York University;: Steinhardt School of Culture; 2016.

Roediger HL 3rd, Butler AC. The critical role of retrieval practice in long-term retention. Trends Cogn Sci. 2011;15(1):20–7.

Brothen T, Wamback C. Effective student use of computerized quizzes. Teach Psychol. 2001;28(4):292–4.

Bijol V, Byrne-Dugan CJ, Hoenig MP. Medical student web-based formative assessment tool for renal pathology. Med Educ Online. 2015;20:26765.

Zhao C, Hu Y. Reflections on study strategy modifications using cognitive load theory and dual Processing Theory in the First Year of Medical School. Med Sci Educ. 2021;31(2):1–6.

Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57.

Miller W, Crabtree B. Primary care research: a multimethod typology and qualitative road map. Doing qualitative Resarch. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1992.

Braun V, Clarke V. Thematic analysis. In: Cooper H, editor. APA Handbook of Research Methods in psychology: vol 2 research designs. Volume 2. American Psychological Association; 2012.

Hennink M, Kaiser BN. Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: a systematic review of empirical tests. Soc Sci Med. 2022;292:114523.

Saunders B, Sim J, Kingstone T, Baker S, Waterfield J, Bartlam B, et al. Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Qual Quant. 2018;52(4):1893–907.

Young JQ, Van Merrienboer J, Durning S, Ten Cate O. Cognitive load theory: implications for medical education: AMEE Guide 86. Med Teach. 2014;36(5):371–84.

Boekaerts M. Self-regulated learning: a new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educators, teachers, and students. Learn Instruction. 1997;7(2):161–86.

Thampinathan S. The application of the constructivism learning theory to physician assistant students in primary care. Educ Health (Abingdon). 2022;35(1):26–30.

AMBOSS, Anki Qbank. 2024 [ https://www.amboss.com/us/anki/qbank

Ghosh P, Jacob J, Goldman E, Manikoth N. Optimizing the Use of an online self-assessment exam to Promote Self-directed learning behaviors in medical students. Med Sci Educ. 2020;30(1):81–5.

Narayanan S, Ramakrishnan R, Durairaj E, Das A. Artificial Intelligence revolutionizing the field of Medical Education. Cureus. 2023;15(11):e49604.

Olmos-Vega FM, Stalmeijer RE, Varpio L, Kahlke R. A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE Guide 149. Med Teach. 2023;45(3):241–51.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the College of Medicine at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center and the University of Kansas School of Medicine, Salina campus for this research study. This project was completed as a component of the degree Master of Education in the Health Professions (MEHP) within Johns Hopkins School of Education.

No funding was obtained for this study.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Family Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Salina, KS, USA

Ryan Sheehy

Teaching and Learning Center, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA

Devin Scott

Office of Medical Education, College of Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA

Diveena Davis

College of Arts and Sciences, Rockhurst University, Kansas City, MO, USA

Marissa Roffler

Department of Pharmacology, Addiction Science, and Toxicology, College of Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA

Trevor Sweatman

College of Health Professions, Sacred Heart University, Fairfield, CT, USA

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors made substantial contributions to this manuscript. R.S., M.R., T.S., and E.N. contributed to the design of the work. D.S. and D.D. contributed to the acquisition of data. R.S., D.S., and M.R. contributed to the analysis of the data. R.S., D.S., M.R., and E.N. contributed to the interpretation of the data. R.S. initially drafted the manuscript with revisions provided by D.S., M.R., and E.N. All authors have approved the submitted version of this manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ryan Sheehy .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval and consent to participate.

Ethical approval for this research study was obtained from the IRB at the UTHSC and the Homewood IRB at Johns Hopkins University. The study was deemed exempt under 45 CFR 46.104(d) (2)(iii). A brief informed consent statement was presented orally to research subjects. A research subject’s willingness to participate in the study constituted documentation to their consent.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Supplementary material 2, supplementary material 4, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Sheehy, R., Scott, D., Davis, D. et al. Medical student use of practice questions in their studies: a qualitative study. BMC Med Educ 24 , 1181 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-06168-6

Download citation

Received : 30 July 2024

Accepted : 10 October 2024

Published : 21 October 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-06168-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Undergraduate medical education
• Study strategies
• Qualitative research
• Practice questions
• Medical school

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• General enquiries: [email protected]