COREQ 32-item checklist
Do pharmacists use social media for patient care?
COREQ item / Manuscript’s excerpt addressing the itemDomain 1: Research team and reflexivity
Personal Characteristics
1. Interviewer/facilitator / The interviews lasted from 30 to 130 min and were conducted face-to-face, by telephone, or Skype depending on the participants’ location and preference. Two interviews were conducted in Portuguese and the remainder in English. Interviews were conducted until saturation was achieved, i.e. until no new information was obtained. All interviews were performed at the Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Sydney by AB, a male pharmacist and researcher, trained in qualitative research methods.
2. Credentials / See item 1
3. Occupation / See item 1
4. Gender / See item 1
5. Experience and training / See item 1
Relationship with participants
6. Relationship established / Prior to the commencement of each interview, the interviewer, to the best of his ability, established rapport with the participant.
7. Participant knowledge of theinterviewer / Participants were fully informed about the project’s aim and their participation prior to providing written consent.
8. Interviewer characteristics / To the best of our knowledge, the interviewer remained unbiased throughout the interviews.
Domain 2: study design
Theoretical framework
9. Methodological orientation andTheory / No methodological orientation underpinned the study design.
Participant selection
10. Sampling / Pharmacists working in a range of professional settings, from nine countries were recruited.
11. Method of approach / See item 1
12. Sample size / Thirty-one participants were interviewed from nine countries.
13. Non-participation / Only one participant contacted by email did not take part.
Setting
14. Setting of data collection / See item 1
15. Presence of non-participants / No one else was present during the interviews
16. Description of sample / See manuscript table 1
Data collection
17. Interview guide / The interview guide (available upon request from authors) was tested for face and content validity in a pilot phase (n=5).
18. Repeat interviews / No repeat interviewswere conducted
19. Audio/visual recording / Interviews were audio-recorded, de-identified and transcribed verbatim.
20. Field notes / Notes were taken to assist the formulation of prompt questions and support data familiarisation for analysis.
21. Duration / See item 1
22. Data saturation / See item 1
23. Transcripts returned / Transcripts were not returned to participants for comment or correction. Only one participant asked to see the transcript, but no revision or correction was made.
Domain 3: analysis and findings
Data analysis
24. Number of data coders / The first three interviews were coded independently by AB and PA and discussed. Throughout the analysis, the coding process, including its identified themes and subthemes, was discussed between the two researchers.
25. Description of the coding tree / Codes with a repeated pattern across the data were grouped into sub-themes and later assembled into overarching themes.
26. Derivation of themes / An inductive approach was used. See item 9
27. Software / Transcripts were coded using software NVivo 10® (QSR International, Australia).
28. Participant checking / Participants did not provide feedback on the findings. One participant asked to see the transcript, but no revision or correction was made.
Reporting
29. Quotations presented / Quotations have been presented where relevant in the text of the manuscript.
30. Data and findings consistent / The findings were illustrated with quotations to better substantiate them. There is consistency in the data and findings presented.
31. Clarity of major themes / All major themeshave been reported with a heading
32. Clarity of minor themes / Minor themes were described and discussed accordingly.