Comparing text mining and manual coding methods: Analysing interview data on quality of care in long-term care for older adults

Author:

Hacking CoenORCID,Verbeek Hilde,Hamers Jan P. H.,Aarts Sil

Abstract

Objectives In long-term care for older adults, large amounts of text are collected relating to the quality of care, such as transcribed interviews. Researchers currently analyze textual data manually to gain insights, which is a time-consuming process. Text mining could provide a solution, as this methodology can be used to analyze large amounts of text automatically. This study aims to compare text mining to manual coding with regard to sentiment analysis and thematic content analysis. Methods Data were collected from interviews with residents (n = 21), family members (n = 20), and care professionals (n = 20). Text mining models were developed and compared to the manual approach. The results of the manual and text mining approaches were evaluated based on three criteria: accuracy, consistency, and expert feedback. Accuracy assessed the similarity between the two approaches, while consistency determined whether each individual approach found the same themes in similar text segments. Expert feedback served as a representation of the perceived correctness of the text mining approach. Results An accuracy analysis revealed that more than 80% of the text segments were assigned the same themes and sentiment using both text mining and manual approaches. Interviews coded with text mining demonstrated higher consistency compared to those coded manually. Expert feedback identified certain limitations in both the text mining and manual approaches. Conclusions and implications While these analyses highlighted the current limitations of text mining, they also exposed certain inconsistencies in manual analysis. This information suggests that text mining has the potential to be an effective and efficient tool for analysing large volumes of textual data in the context of long-term care for older adults.

Publisher

Public Library of Science (PLoS)

Subject

Multidisciplinary

Reference47 articles.

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3