(Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) 6 used NVivo to manage data for their respective different study designs. Although CAQDAS has been available since 1984, very few qualitative health researchers (16%) report using it 7. This may be due to the hassles that one has to go through to master the software and or the misconceptions that are associated with using CAQDAS 7.

While the issue of mastering CAQDAS has received ample attention, little has been done to address the misconceptions associated with the use of CAQDAS. In this paper, the author reflects on his own experience of using NVivo. The objective is to provide evidence-based implications of using qualitative data analysis software, so as to keep fellow health researchers well-informed, and consequently allow them to make informed decisions on whether to use CAQDAS or not.

To make this practical, I will use one of the recent studies I have analysed using NVivo. Actual data management process using NVivo is presented first and is followed by deep reflection of the process. No specific fieldwork or data collection was commissioned for the current study. The reflections presented in this paper are by-products of the data analysis that the author conducted from 2011 to 2012 for a study titled ‘Examining the differences in uptake of antenatal care between young and old women in Zomba, Malawi’. The aforementioned study was conducted to understand the differences in uptake of antenatal care (ANC) between young pregnant women (primagravida) and grown-up mothers (multigravida). It was generally a qualitative comparative study, involving poor villagers in Zomba district, Malawi.

By the nature of the study topic, all the participants were pregnant women.

Nvivo thematic analysis methods