Full article: Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing researcher

In response to the increasing use of thematic analysis (TA), and particularly the TA approach we have developed, in qualitative and mixed methods research published in IJTH, the editors of the journal have invited us to provide a commentary on good practice and common problems in TA research. The aim of this commentary is to guide researchers in producing and reporting methodologically coherent TA and reviewers in assessing what constitutes good practice, and ultimately to support IJTH in publishing high quality TA. This commentary is based on a review of 20 papers published in IJTH citing our work Footnote 1—typically Braun and Clarke ( Citation 2006), the paper in which we first outlined our TA approach—with most authors claiming to have “followed” our approach, and a minority citing our work but using other approaches. It’s important to stress that our goal here is not to encourage or enforce strict adherence to the procedures we have outlined—or what has been dubbed methodolatry (C

In response to the increasing use of thematic analysis (TA), and particularly the TA approach we have developed, in qualitative and mixed methods research published in IJTH, the editors of the journal have invited us to provide a commentary on good practice and common problems in TA research. The aim of this commentary is to guide researchers in producing and reporting methodologically coherent TA and reviewers in assessing what constitutes good practice, and ultimately to support IJTH in publishing high quality TA. This commentary is based on a review of 20 papers published in IJTH citing our