Assessing the Feasibility of Epistemic Network Analysis in Exploring the Conflict Between Oral Health and Patient Autonomy

Medical ethics has relied heavily on theoretical argumentation; however, addressing complex, real-world ethical issues necessitates contextual understanding and empirical research. Qualitative methods are appropriate for exploring normative and phenomenological perspectives; such data are usually coded to explore patterns therein. Our objective was to assess the utility of generating a quantitative model of code co-occurrences within qualitative data. Via an empirical study on the conflict of oral health and patient autonomy, we examined the strengths and limitations of Epistemic Network Analysis (ENA) in displaying code interactions, analyzing various groupings of data, and paying analytical heed to both the individual and groups of data providers. Despite its limitations, ENA could effectively display co-occurrence patterns in various groupings of data, which served exploratory purposes well. ENA also enabled iteration between qualitative and quantified aspects of our data, providing additional warrants for qualitative insights. Creating such models enables the researcher to identify points of consensus and divergence in stakeholder narratives and leverage various perspectives to inform, validate, or refine theory.