{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015332197614991482, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.821782178217822, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Qualitative Research and the Gingerbread Man

Recent articles on research methodology in the pages of this journal signify a trend towards a wider use of qualitative methods. In doing so, they join a growing list of papers from a wide range of journals, including the influential British Medical Journal (BMJ). The discovery of qualitative methods is good news for all those who have spent many years arguing their case in the health field. However, there are potential pitfalls. These threaten to undermine qualitative researchers if open debate on the nature of their work is masked by