This approach is rooted in anthropology and is concerned with the description and interpretation of cultural patterns of groups and the understanding of the cultural meanings people use to organize and interpret their experiences. In such studies the researcher studies the meaning of behaviour, language and interactions of the ‘culture-sharing’ group, for example a hospital, a health unit, or the different ways in which pain is expressed by men and women.

The purpose of phenomenology is to uncover the meaning of how humans experience phenomena through the description of those experiences as they are lived by individuals. For example, what is the meaning of healing to women with cancer, or, what is the meaning of fear of dementia in ageing people? This approach is different from ethnography because it focuses on experiences from the perspective of the individual rather than understanding a group or cultural pattern.

Grounded theory is a method that is primarily used to develop a theory or conceptual model. Usually the researcher begins with a broad query in a particular topic area and then collects relevant information about the topic. As data collection continues, each new piece of information is reviewed, compared and contrasted with earlier collected information. From this constant comparison process commonalities and dissimilarities among categories of information become clear and ultimately a theory that explains the observations is inductively developed. For example, this approach could be used to develop a theory of how people diagnosed with cancer decide whether or not to use CAM or to explain why some people refuse conventional treatment options.

Case studies include either indepth analyses of single cases or comparison across multiple cases (Yin 2003). Usually data collection spans a variety of sources including documents, interviews and observation. Data from different sources are triangulated (i.e. information collected using different strategies is used to examine the same phenomenon from different perspectives) to provide an indepth view of each case. When multiple cases are available, analysis is first completed on a case-by-case basis and then cross-case comparisons are made (Miles and Huberman, 1994 and Stake, 2006). For example, this approach may facilitate identification of success factors for integrative clinics where each clinic is analysed as a separate case.

A biographical study is the investigation of an individual and his or her experiences as told to the researcher or found in documents and archival material (Creswell 1998). Life history inquiry is a form of a biographical study, and this focuses on the individual life course. This type of research is concerned with eliciting life experiences and with how individuals interpret and attribute meanings to these experiences (DePoy & Gitlin 1998).

Interviews are the main data collection method employed by qualitative researchers. Interviewing techniques vary from semistructured interview schedules that ensure all participants are asked to discuss the same topics to completely unstructured interviews or narratives where the participant primarily determines what is discussed (Berg, 1995 and Morse and Field, 1995). Unstructured interviews are generally used when the researcher knows very little about the topic and is unable to prepare a series of questions because s/he doesn’t know what to ask. In this case it is best simply to let the participants tell their stories. Semistructured interviews are used for more focused inquiries where the researcher knows many of the key topics of interest. Questions are worded so that they are open-ended and the interviewer should allow the participant to guide the order in which the topics are discussed. For example, if the participant begins talking about question 5 when answering question 2, the interviewer should follow the participant’s lead by probing about question 5. The questions that have been skipped can be addressed later in the interview. To enhance semistructured interviews it is important to maintain a conversational flow with the participants. Interviews are usually audio-recorded. Face-to-face interviews are best to establish rapport with the participant; however, telephone interviews can facilitate data collection across greater physical distances. An advantage of individual interviews is the ability to elicit information about a specific process or changes over time. Interviews allow the investigation of indepth personal experiences of phenomena and can be particularly useful when discussing sensitive (personal) topics. The two main disadvantages of individual interviews are the fact that they can be time-consuming and expensive. For example, usually no more than two interviews can be scheduled in a single day and analysis of individual interview transcripts is often very time-intensive. Costs related to travel, interviewer time and transcription can make individual interviews too expensive for large studies.

One way to minimize costs and decrease data collection time is to interview participants in groups, usually called focus groups. Typically, focus groups consist of six to eight individuals who share some characteristics (e.g. disease diagnoses; experience of a therapy) and a trained moderator leads the group through a discussion of predetermined topics (Morgan 1998). Focus groups are very useful for gathering a wide range of opinions quickly or to develop consensus guidelines in a group process. Another advantage of focus groups is the ability to capture and analyse interactions between individuals attending the group, for example, one participant trying to explain his/her point of view to another participant, or disagreements that arise between group members. This also emphasizes the need for a skilled moderator who can ensure everyone has an opportunity to express his/her views and that one participant does not unduly influence the opinions of others. Since it is necessary to schedule multiple individuals to attend each group, focus groups do not work well with individuals who are difficult to schedule, such as busy physicians.

Observation is another way to explore the interaction of participants with each other (Lincoln & Guba 1985). The main purpose of observation is to collect data about participants in a natural setting. Observation is often used to provide breadth and context that cannot be achieved by interviews alone. However, it can be time-consuming and expensive, so it needs to be justified based on the research question and the value it can add needs to be clearly specified (Morse and Field, 1995 and Creswell, 1998). Consent is an important issue to consider when designing a study that includes an observational component. Generally ethics boards permit observational data collection in public spaces without obtaining the informed consent of those being observed. However, observation of patients in health care settings, or clinicians interacting with each other in integrated clinics, requires the consent of those being observed. Observational strategies are generally categorized by the degree of researcher involvement in the setting and range from complete participation of the researcher (e.g. a naturopathic doctor who is also a PhD student observing how fellow practitioners interact with patients and other clinicians in an integrative clinic) to complete observer (e.g. a sociologist observing patients receiving acupuncture treatments). The former is challenging due to issues related to informed consent (ensuring consent of those being observed or justifying why the intent to observe cannot be disclosed to those being observed) and the difficulty the participant observer is likely to have with objectivity (it is difficult to maintain the work role while taking a researcher perspective). The latter has the disadvantage of not permitting the researcher to ask questions or clarify what is happening, which can lead to misinterpretation of what is being observed. In practice, normally some compromise between these two extremes is found to be the best way to collect data using observation techniques (Lincoln and Guba, 1985 and Morse and Field, 1995).

Finally, any written document can be used for qualitative inquiries. Diaries, letters, personal notes and official documents can all inform the investigation. Although qualitative analysis is most easily performed on written texts, increasingly photographs, works of art, videos and performance art are also considered as sources of data for qualitative inquiry. Ultimately, the source of data and the data collection technique should be driven by the research question.