he review links potential findings of the study to a wider framework of theoretical knowledge in the area of community health services and helps the reader identify gaps in the existing body of knowledge and justify the need for their study. Such synthesis of relevant information relating to the previous research provides adequate background to the study.
Specific nature of the formulated research purposes raised a set of specific requirements to be addressed within a certain methodological framework. The context of study undertaken by Bissel and colleagues suggests that the choice of qualitative approach is the most appropriate alternative in this case. Such choice of methodology and research design is absolutely justified by the formulated research purposes and obtained results:
the type of reasoning utilised by Bissel and colleagues is apparently inductive: the authors do not formulate any specific hypothesis or suggest a theory to be tested. Instead, they offer several research objectives to be fulfilled.
Data gathering techniques chosen by the authors within the qualitative methodology are congruent with the purposes of their study. The authors prefer semi-structured interview is the instrument of data collection. Semi-structured interview is one of the most popular types of interviewing due to several reasons. Firstly, semi-structured interviewing allow for focused two-way communication. Secondly, while the questionnaire framework implies formulation of detailed questions, a semi-structured interview starts with more general topic or questions, identified ahead of time, and makes it possible for the interviewer to seek for relationships between the questions/topic and variety of relevant issues. The answers given by the interviewee serve as the basis for more specific questions formulated during the interview. And finally, semi-structured interviewing is not as time-consuming and costly as other qualitative methods, while the data is valid, diverse and