case study in the use

The Ultimate Guide to Qualitative Research - Part 1: The Basics

• Introduction and overview
• What is qualitative research?
• What is qualitative data?
• Examples of qualitative data
• Qualitative vs. quantitative research
• Mixed methods
• Qualitative research preparation
• Theoretical perspective
• Theoretical framework
• Literature reviews

Research question

• Conceptual framework
• Conceptual vs. theoretical framework

Data collection

• Qualitative research methods
• Focus groups
• Observational research

What is a case study?

Applications for case study research, what is a good case study, process of case study design, benefits and limitations of case studies.

• Ethnographical research
• Ethical considerations
• Confidentiality and privacy
• Power dynamics
• Reflexivity

Case studies

Case studies are essential to qualitative research , offering a lens through which researchers can investigate complex phenomena within their real-life contexts. This chapter explores the concept, purpose, applications, examples, and types of case studies and provides guidance on how to conduct case study research effectively.

Whereas quantitative methods look at phenomena at scale, case study research looks at a concept or phenomenon in considerable detail. While analyzing a single case can help understand one perspective regarding the object of research inquiry, analyzing multiple cases can help obtain a more holistic sense of the topic or issue. Let's provide a basic definition of a case study, then explore its characteristics and role in the qualitative research process.

Definition of a case study

A case study in qualitative research is a strategy of inquiry that involves an in-depth investigation of a phenomenon within its real-world context. It provides researchers with the opportunity to acquire an in-depth understanding of intricate details that might not be as apparent or accessible through other methods of research. The specific case or cases being studied can be a single person, group, or organization – demarcating what constitutes a relevant case worth studying depends on the researcher and their research question .

Among qualitative research methods , a case study relies on multiple sources of evidence, such as documents, artifacts, interviews , or observations , to present a complete and nuanced understanding of the phenomenon under investigation. The objective is to illuminate the readers' understanding of the phenomenon beyond its abstract statistical or theoretical explanations.

Characteristics of case studies

Case studies typically possess a number of distinct characteristics that set them apart from other research methods. These characteristics include a focus on holistic description and explanation, flexibility in the design and data collection methods, reliance on multiple sources of evidence, and emphasis on the context in which the phenomenon occurs.

Furthermore, case studies can often involve a longitudinal examination of the case, meaning they study the case over a period of time. These characteristics allow case studies to yield comprehensive, in-depth, and richly contextualized insights about the phenomenon of interest.

The role of case studies in research

Case studies hold a unique position in the broader landscape of research methods aimed at theory development. They are instrumental when the primary research interest is to gain an intensive, detailed understanding of a phenomenon in its real-life context.

In addition, case studies can serve different purposes within research - they can be used for exploratory, descriptive, or explanatory purposes, depending on the research question and objectives. This flexibility and depth make case studies a valuable tool in the toolkit of qualitative researchers.

Remember, a well-conducted case study can offer a rich, insightful contribution to both academic and practical knowledge through theory development or theory verification, thus enhancing our understanding of complex phenomena in their real-world contexts.

What is the purpose of a case study?

Case study research aims for a more comprehensive understanding of phenomena, requiring various research methods to gather information for qualitative analysis . Ultimately, a case study can allow the researcher to gain insight into a particular object of inquiry and develop a theoretical framework relevant to the research inquiry.

Why use case studies in qualitative research?

Using case studies as a research strategy depends mainly on the nature of the research question and the researcher's access to the data.

Conducting case study research provides a level of detail and contextual richness that other research methods might not offer. They are beneficial when there's a need to understand complex social phenomena within their natural contexts.

The explanatory, exploratory, and descriptive roles of case studies

Case studies can take on various roles depending on the research objectives. They can be exploratory when the research aims to discover new phenomena or define new research questions; they are descriptive when the objective is to depict a phenomenon within its context in a detailed manner; and they can be explanatory if the goal is to understand specific relationships within the studied context. Thus, the versatility of case studies allows researchers to approach their topic from different angles, offering multiple ways to uncover and interpret the data .

The impact of case studies on knowledge development

Case studies play a significant role in knowledge development across various disciplines. Analysis of cases provides an avenue for researchers to explore phenomena within their context based on the collected data.

This can result in the production of rich, practical insights that can be instrumental in both theory-building and practice. Case studies allow researchers to delve into the intricacies and complexities of real-life situations, uncovering insights that might otherwise remain hidden.

Types of case studies

In qualitative research , a case study is not a one-size-fits-all approach. Depending on the nature of the research question and the specific objectives of the study, researchers might choose to use different types of case studies. These types differ in their focus, methodology, and the level of detail they provide about the phenomenon under investigation.

Understanding these types is crucial for selecting the most appropriate approach for your research project and effectively achieving your research goals. Let's briefly look at the main types of case studies.

Exploratory case studies

Exploratory case studies are typically conducted to develop a theory or framework around an understudied phenomenon. They can also serve as a precursor to a larger-scale research project. Exploratory case studies are useful when a researcher wants to identify the key issues or questions which can spur more extensive study or be used to develop propositions for further research. These case studies are characterized by flexibility, allowing researchers to explore various aspects of a phenomenon as they emerge, which can also form the foundation for subsequent studies.

Descriptive case studies

Descriptive case studies aim to provide a complete and accurate representation of a phenomenon or event within its context. These case studies are often based on an established theoretical framework, which guides how data is collected and analyzed. The researcher is concerned with describing the phenomenon in detail, as it occurs naturally, without trying to influence or manipulate it.

Explanatory case studies

Explanatory case studies are focused on explanation - they seek to clarify how or why certain phenomena occur. Often used in complex, real-life situations, they can be particularly valuable in clarifying causal relationships among concepts and understanding the interplay between different factors within a specific context.

Intrinsic, instrumental, and collective case studies

These three categories of case studies focus on the nature and purpose of the study. An intrinsic case study is conducted when a researcher has an inherent interest in the case itself. Instrumental case studies are employed when the case is used to provide insight into a particular issue or phenomenon. A collective case study, on the other hand, involves studying multiple cases simultaneously to investigate some general phenomena.

Each type of case study serves a different purpose and has its own strengths and challenges. The selection of the type should be guided by the research question and objectives, as well as the context and constraints of the research.

The flexibility, depth, and contextual richness offered by case studies make this approach an excellent research method for various fields of study. They enable researchers to investigate real-world phenomena within their specific contexts, capturing nuances that other research methods might miss. Across numerous fields, case studies provide valuable insights into complex issues.

Critical information systems research

Case studies provide a detailed understanding of the role and impact of information systems in different contexts. They offer a platform to explore how information systems are designed, implemented, and used and how they interact with various social, economic, and political factors. Case studies in this field often focus on examining the intricate relationship between technology, organizational processes, and user behavior, helping to uncover insights that can inform better system design and implementation.

Health research

Health research is another field where case studies are highly valuable. They offer a way to explore patient experiences, healthcare delivery processes, and the impact of various interventions in a real-world context.

Case studies can provide a deep understanding of a patient's journey, giving insights into the intricacies of disease progression, treatment effects, and the psychosocial aspects of health and illness.

Asthma research studies

Specifically within medical research, studies on asthma often employ case studies to explore the individual and environmental factors that influence asthma development, management, and outcomes. A case study can provide rich, detailed data about individual patients' experiences, from the triggers and symptoms they experience to the effectiveness of various management strategies. This can be crucial for developing patient-centered asthma care approaches.

Other fields

Apart from the fields mentioned, case studies are also extensively used in business and management research, education research, and political sciences, among many others. They provide an opportunity to delve into the intricacies of real-world situations, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of various phenomena.

Case studies, with their depth and contextual focus, offer unique insights across these varied fields. They allow researchers to illuminate the complexities of real-life situations, contributing to both theory and practice.

Whatever field you're in, ATLAS.ti puts your data to work for you

Download a free trial of ATLAS.ti to turn your data into insights.

Understanding the key elements of case study design is crucial for conducting rigorous and impactful case study research. A well-structured design guides the researcher through the process, ensuring that the study is methodologically sound and its findings are reliable and valid. The main elements of case study design include the research question , propositions, units of analysis, and the logic linking the data to the propositions.

The research question is the foundation of any research study. A good research question guides the direction of the study and informs the selection of the case, the methods of collecting data, and the analysis techniques. A well-formulated research question in case study research is typically clear, focused, and complex enough to merit further detailed examination of the relevant case(s).

Propositions

Propositions, though not necessary in every case study, provide a direction by stating what we might expect to find in the data collected. They guide how data is collected and analyzed by helping researchers focus on specific aspects of the case. They are particularly important in explanatory case studies, which seek to understand the relationships among concepts within the studied phenomenon.

Units of analysis

The unit of analysis refers to the case, or the main entity or entities that are being analyzed in the study. In case study research, the unit of analysis can be an individual, a group, an organization, a decision, an event, or even a time period. It's crucial to clearly define the unit of analysis, as it shapes the qualitative data analysis process by allowing the researcher to analyze a particular case and synthesize analysis across multiple case studies to draw conclusions.

Argumentation

This refers to the inferential model that allows researchers to draw conclusions from the data. The researcher needs to ensure that there is a clear link between the data, the propositions (if any), and the conclusions drawn. This argumentation is what enables the researcher to make valid and credible inferences about the phenomenon under study.

Understanding and carefully considering these elements in the design phase of a case study can significantly enhance the quality of the research. It can help ensure that the study is methodologically sound and its findings contribute meaningful insights about the case.

Ready to jumpstart your research with ATLAS.ti?

Conceptualize your research project with our intuitive data analysis interface. Download a free trial today.

Conducting a case study involves several steps, from defining the research question and selecting the case to collecting and analyzing data . This section outlines these key stages, providing a practical guide on how to conduct case study research.

Defining the research question

The first step in case study research is defining a clear, focused research question. This question should guide the entire research process, from case selection to analysis. It's crucial to ensure that the research question is suitable for a case study approach. Typically, such questions are exploratory or descriptive in nature and focus on understanding a phenomenon within its real-life context.

Selecting and defining the case

The selection of the case should be based on the research question and the objectives of the study. It involves choosing a unique example or a set of examples that provide rich, in-depth data about the phenomenon under investigation. After selecting the case, it's crucial to define it clearly, setting the boundaries of the case, including the time period and the specific context.

Previous research can help guide the case study design. When considering a case study, an example of a case could be taken from previous case study research and used to define cases in a new research inquiry. Considering recently published examples can help understand how to select and define cases effectively.

Developing a detailed case study protocol

A case study protocol outlines the procedures and general rules to be followed during the case study. This includes the data collection methods to be used, the sources of data, and the procedures for analysis. Having a detailed case study protocol ensures consistency and reliability in the study.

The protocol should also consider how to work with the people involved in the research context to grant the research team access to collecting data. As mentioned in previous sections of this guide, establishing rapport is an essential component of qualitative research as it shapes the overall potential for collecting and analyzing data.

Collecting data

Gathering data in case study research often involves multiple sources of evidence, including documents, archival records, interviews, observations, and physical artifacts. This allows for a comprehensive understanding of the case. The process for gathering data should be systematic and carefully documented to ensure the reliability and validity of the study.

Analyzing and interpreting data

The next step is analyzing the data. This involves organizing the data , categorizing it into themes or patterns , and interpreting these patterns to answer the research question. The analysis might also involve comparing the findings with prior research or theoretical propositions.

Writing the case study report

The final step is writing the case study report . This should provide a detailed description of the case, the data, the analysis process, and the findings. The report should be clear, organized, and carefully written to ensure that the reader can understand the case and the conclusions drawn from it.

Each of these steps is crucial in ensuring that the case study research is rigorous, reliable, and provides valuable insights about the case.

The type, depth, and quality of data in your study can significantly influence the validity and utility of the study. In case study research, data is usually collected from multiple sources to provide a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the case. This section will outline the various methods of collecting data used in case study research and discuss considerations for ensuring the quality of the data.

Interviews are a common method of gathering data in case study research. They can provide rich, in-depth data about the perspectives, experiences, and interpretations of the individuals involved in the case. Interviews can be structured , semi-structured , or unstructured , depending on the research question and the degree of flexibility needed.

Observations

Observations involve the researcher observing the case in its natural setting, providing first-hand information about the case and its context. Observations can provide data that might not be revealed in interviews or documents, such as non-verbal cues or contextual information.

Documents and artifacts

Documents and archival records provide a valuable source of data in case study research. They can include reports, letters, memos, meeting minutes, email correspondence, and various public and private documents related to the case.

These records can provide historical context, corroborate evidence from other sources, and offer insights into the case that might not be apparent from interviews or observations.

Physical artifacts refer to any physical evidence related to the case, such as tools, products, or physical environments. These artifacts can provide tangible insights into the case, complementing the data gathered from other sources.

Ensuring the quality of data collection

Determining the quality of data in case study research requires careful planning and execution. It's crucial to ensure that the data is reliable, accurate, and relevant to the research question. This involves selecting appropriate methods of collecting data, properly training interviewers or observers, and systematically recording and storing the data. It also includes considering ethical issues related to collecting and handling data, such as obtaining informed consent and ensuring the privacy and confidentiality of the participants.

Data analysis

Analyzing case study research involves making sense of the rich, detailed data to answer the research question. This process can be challenging due to the volume and complexity of case study data. However, a systematic and rigorous approach to analysis can ensure that the findings are credible and meaningful. This section outlines the main steps and considerations in analyzing data in case study research.

Organizing the data

The first step in the analysis is organizing the data. This involves sorting the data into manageable sections, often according to the data source or the theme. This step can also involve transcribing interviews, digitizing physical artifacts, or organizing observational data.

Categorizing and coding the data

Once the data is organized, the next step is to categorize or code the data. This involves identifying common themes, patterns, or concepts in the data and assigning codes to relevant data segments. Coding can be done manually or with the help of software tools, and in either case, qualitative analysis software can greatly facilitate the entire coding process. Coding helps to reduce the data to a set of themes or categories that can be more easily analyzed.

Identifying patterns and themes

After coding the data, the researcher looks for patterns or themes in the coded data. This involves comparing and contrasting the codes and looking for relationships or patterns among them. The identified patterns and themes should help answer the research question.

Interpreting the data

Once patterns and themes have been identified, the next step is to interpret these findings. This involves explaining what the patterns or themes mean in the context of the research question and the case. This interpretation should be grounded in the data, but it can also involve drawing on theoretical concepts or prior research.

Verification of the data

The last step in the analysis is verification. This involves checking the accuracy and consistency of the analysis process and confirming that the findings are supported by the data. This can involve re-checking the original data, checking the consistency of codes, or seeking feedback from research participants or peers.

Like any research method , case study research has its strengths and limitations. Researchers must be aware of these, as they can influence the design, conduct, and interpretation of the study.

Understanding the strengths and limitations of case study research can also guide researchers in deciding whether this approach is suitable for their research question . This section outlines some of the key strengths and limitations of case study research.

Benefits include the following:

• Rich, detailed data: One of the main strengths of case study research is that it can generate rich, detailed data about the case. This can provide a deep understanding of the case and its context, which can be valuable in exploring complex phenomena.
• Flexibility: Case study research is flexible in terms of design , data collection , and analysis . A sufficient degree of flexibility allows the researcher to adapt the study according to the case and the emerging findings.
• Real-world context: Case study research involves studying the case in its real-world context, which can provide valuable insights into the interplay between the case and its context.
• Multiple sources of evidence: Case study research often involves collecting data from multiple sources , which can enhance the robustness and validity of the findings.

On the other hand, researchers should consider the following limitations:

• Generalizability: A common criticism of case study research is that its findings might not be generalizable to other cases due to the specificity and uniqueness of each case.
• Time and resource intensive: Case study research can be time and resource intensive due to the depth of the investigation and the amount of collected data.
• Complexity of analysis: The rich, detailed data generated in case study research can make analyzing the data challenging.
• Subjectivity: Given the nature of case study research, there may be a higher degree of subjectivity in interpreting the data , so researchers need to reflect on this and transparently convey to audiences how the research was conducted.

Being aware of these strengths and limitations can help researchers design and conduct case study research effectively and interpret and report the findings appropriately.

Ready to analyze your data with ATLAS.ti?

See how our intuitive software can draw key insights from your data with a free trial today.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods

Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods

Published on 5 May 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 30 January 2023.

A case study is a detailed study of a specific subject, such as a person, group, place, event, organisation, or phenomenon. Case studies are commonly used in social, educational, clinical, and business research.

A case study research design usually involves qualitative methods , but quantitative methods are sometimes also used. Case studies are good for describing , comparing, evaluating, and understanding different aspects of a research problem .

Table of contents

When to do a case study, step 1: select a case, step 2: build a theoretical framework, step 3: collect your data, step 4: describe and analyse the case.

A case study is an appropriate research design when you want to gain concrete, contextual, in-depth knowledge about a specific real-world subject. It allows you to explore the key characteristics, meanings, and implications of the case.

Case studies are often a good choice in a thesis or dissertation . They keep your project focused and manageable when you don’t have the time or resources to do large-scale research.

You might use just one complex case study where you explore a single subject in depth, or conduct multiple case studies to compare and illuminate different aspects of your research problem.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Once you have developed your problem statement and research questions , you should be ready to choose the specific case that you want to focus on. A good case study should have the potential to:

• Provide new or unexpected insights into the subject
• Challenge or complicate existing assumptions and theories
• Propose practical courses of action to resolve a problem
• Open up new directions for future research

Unlike quantitative or experimental research, a strong case study does not require a random or representative sample. In fact, case studies often deliberately focus on unusual, neglected, or outlying cases which may shed new light on the research problem.

If you find yourself aiming to simultaneously investigate and solve an issue, consider conducting action research . As its name suggests, action research conducts research and takes action at the same time, and is highly iterative and flexible. 

However, you can also choose a more common or representative case to exemplify a particular category, experience, or phenomenon.

While case studies focus more on concrete details than general theories, they should usually have some connection with theory in the field. This way the case study is not just an isolated description, but is integrated into existing knowledge about the topic. It might aim to:

• Exemplify a theory by showing how it explains the case under investigation
• Expand on a theory by uncovering new concepts and ideas that need to be incorporated
• Challenge a theory by exploring an outlier case that doesn’t fit with established assumptions

To ensure that your analysis of the case has a solid academic grounding, you should conduct a literature review of sources related to the topic and develop a theoretical framework . This means identifying key concepts and theories to guide your analysis and interpretation.

There are many different research methods you can use to collect data on your subject. Case studies tend to focus on qualitative data using methods such as interviews, observations, and analysis of primary and secondary sources (e.g., newspaper articles, photographs, official records). Sometimes a case study will also collect quantitative data .

The aim is to gain as thorough an understanding as possible of the case and its context.

In writing up the case study, you need to bring together all the relevant aspects to give as complete a picture as possible of the subject.

How you report your findings depends on the type of research you are doing. Some case studies are structured like a standard scientific paper or thesis, with separate sections or chapters for the methods , results , and discussion .

Others are written in a more narrative style, aiming to explore the case from various angles and analyse its meanings and implications (for example, by using textual analysis or discourse analysis ).

In all cases, though, make sure to give contextual details about the case, connect it back to the literature and theory, and discuss how it fits into wider patterns or debates.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, January 30). Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods. Scribbr. Retrieved 3 June 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/case-studies/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, correlational research | guide, design & examples, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples, descriptive research design | definition, methods & examples.

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

What the Case Study Method Really Teaches

• Nitin Nohria

Seven meta-skills that stick even if the cases fade from memory.

It’s been 100 years since Harvard Business School began using the case study method. Beyond teaching specific subject matter, the case study method excels in instilling meta-skills in students. This article explains the importance of seven such skills: preparation, discernment, bias recognition, judgement, collaboration, curiosity, and self-confidence.

During my decade as dean of Harvard Business School, I spent hundreds of hours talking with our alumni. To enliven these conversations, I relied on a favorite question: “What was the most important thing you learned from your time in our MBA program?”

• Nitin Nohria is the George F. Baker Jr. and Distinguished Service University Professor. He served as the 10th dean of Harvard Business School, from 2010 to 2020.

Partner Center

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

A case study research paper examines a person, place, event, condition, phenomenon, or other type of subject of analysis in order to extrapolate  key themes and results that help predict future trends, illuminate previously hidden issues that can be applied to practice, and/or provide a means for understanding an important research problem with greater clarity. A case study research paper usually examines a single subject of analysis, but case study papers can also be designed as a comparative investigation that shows relationships between two or more subjects. The methods used to study a case can rest within a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method investigative paradigm.

Case Studies. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Mills, Albert J. , Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010 ; “What is a Case Study?” In Swanborn, Peter G. Case Study Research: What, Why and How? London: SAGE, 2010.

How to Approach Writing a Case Study Research Paper

General information about how to choose a topic to investigate can be found under the " Choosing a Research Problem " tab in the Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper writing guide. Review this page because it may help you identify a subject of analysis that can be investigated using a case study design.

However, identifying a case to investigate involves more than choosing the research problem . A case study encompasses a problem contextualized around the application of in-depth analysis, interpretation, and discussion, often resulting in specific recommendations for action or for improving existing conditions. As Seawright and Gerring note, practical considerations such as time and access to information can influence case selection, but these issues should not be the sole factors used in describing the methodological justification for identifying a particular case to study. Given this, selecting a case includes considering the following:

• The case represents an unusual or atypical example of a research problem that requires more in-depth analysis? Cases often represent a topic that rests on the fringes of prior investigations because the case may provide new ways of understanding the research problem. For example, if the research problem is to identify strategies to improve policies that support girl's access to secondary education in predominantly Muslim nations, you could consider using Azerbaijan as a case study rather than selecting a more obvious nation in the Middle East. Doing so may reveal important new insights into recommending how governments in other predominantly Muslim nations can formulate policies that support improved access to education for girls.
• The case provides important insight or illuminate a previously hidden problem? In-depth analysis of a case can be based on the hypothesis that the case study will reveal trends or issues that have not been exposed in prior research or will reveal new and important implications for practice. For example, anecdotal evidence may suggest drug use among homeless veterans is related to their patterns of travel throughout the day. Assuming prior studies have not looked at individual travel choices as a way to study access to illicit drug use, a case study that observes a homeless veteran could reveal how issues of personal mobility choices facilitate regular access to illicit drugs. Note that it is important to conduct a thorough literature review to ensure that your assumption about the need to reveal new insights or previously hidden problems is valid and evidence-based.
• The case challenges and offers a counter-point to prevailing assumptions? Over time, research on any given topic can fall into a trap of developing assumptions based on outdated studies that are still applied to new or changing conditions or the idea that something should simply be accepted as "common sense," even though the issue has not been thoroughly tested in current practice. A case study analysis may offer an opportunity to gather evidence that challenges prevailing assumptions about a research problem and provide a new set of recommendations applied to practice that have not been tested previously. For example, perhaps there has been a long practice among scholars to apply a particular theory in explaining the relationship between two subjects of analysis. Your case could challenge this assumption by applying an innovative theoretical framework [perhaps borrowed from another discipline] to explore whether this approach offers new ways of understanding the research problem. Taking a contrarian stance is one of the most important ways that new knowledge and understanding develops from existing literature.
• The case provides an opportunity to pursue action leading to the resolution of a problem? Another way to think about choosing a case to study is to consider how the results from investigating a particular case may result in findings that reveal ways in which to resolve an existing or emerging problem. For example, studying the case of an unforeseen incident, such as a fatal accident at a railroad crossing, can reveal hidden issues that could be applied to preventative measures that contribute to reducing the chance of accidents in the future. In this example, a case study investigating the accident could lead to a better understanding of where to strategically locate additional signals at other railroad crossings so as to better warn drivers of an approaching train, particularly when visibility is hindered by heavy rain, fog, or at night.
• The case offers a new direction in future research? A case study can be used as a tool for an exploratory investigation that highlights the need for further research about the problem. A case can be used when there are few studies that help predict an outcome or that establish a clear understanding about how best to proceed in addressing a problem. For example, after conducting a thorough literature review [very important!], you discover that little research exists showing the ways in which women contribute to promoting water conservation in rural communities of east central Africa. A case study of how women contribute to saving water in a rural village of Uganda can lay the foundation for understanding the need for more thorough research that documents how women in their roles as cooks and family caregivers think about water as a valuable resource within their community. This example of a case study could also point to the need for scholars to build new theoretical frameworks around the topic [e.g., applying feminist theories of work and family to the issue of water conservation].

Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. “Building Theories from Case Study Research.” Academy of Management Review 14 (October 1989): 532-550; Emmel, Nick. Sampling and Choosing Cases in Qualitative Research: A Realist Approach . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2013; Gerring, John. “What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for?” American Political Science Review 98 (May 2004): 341-354; Mills, Albert J. , Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010; Seawright, Jason and John Gerring. "Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research." Political Research Quarterly 61 (June 2008): 294-308.

Structure and Writing Style

The purpose of a paper in the social sciences designed around a case study is to thoroughly investigate a subject of analysis in order to reveal a new understanding about the research problem and, in so doing, contributing new knowledge to what is already known from previous studies. In applied social sciences disciplines [e.g., education, social work, public administration, etc.], case studies may also be used to reveal best practices, highlight key programs, or investigate interesting aspects of professional work.

In general, the structure of a case study research paper is not all that different from a standard college-level research paper. However, there are subtle differences you should be aware of. Here are the key elements to organizing and writing a case study research paper.

I.  Introduction

As with any research paper, your introduction should serve as a roadmap for your readers to ascertain the scope and purpose of your study . The introduction to a case study research paper, however, should not only describe the research problem and its significance, but you should also succinctly describe why the case is being used and how it relates to addressing the problem. The two elements should be linked. With this in mind, a good introduction answers these four questions:

• What is being studied? Describe the research problem and describe the subject of analysis [the case] you have chosen to address the problem. Explain how they are linked and what elements of the case will help to expand knowledge and understanding about the problem.
• Why is this topic important to investigate? Describe the significance of the research problem and state why a case study design and the subject of analysis that the paper is designed around is appropriate in addressing the problem.
• What did we know about this topic before I did this study? Provide background that helps lead the reader into the more in-depth literature review to follow. If applicable, summarize prior case study research applied to the research problem and why it fails to adequately address the problem. Describe why your case will be useful. If no prior case studies have been used to address the research problem, explain why you have selected this subject of analysis.
• How will this study advance new knowledge or new ways of understanding? Explain why your case study will be suitable in helping to expand knowledge and understanding about the research problem.

Each of these questions should be addressed in no more than a few paragraphs. Exceptions to this can be when you are addressing a complex research problem or subject of analysis that requires more in-depth background information.

II.  Literature Review

The literature review for a case study research paper is generally structured the same as it is for any college-level research paper. The difference, however, is that the literature review is focused on providing background information and  enabling historical interpretation of the subject of analysis in relation to the research problem the case is intended to address . This includes synthesizing studies that help to:

• Place relevant works in the context of their contribution to understanding the case study being investigated . This would involve summarizing studies that have used a similar subject of analysis to investigate the research problem. If there is literature using the same or a very similar case to study, you need to explain why duplicating past research is important [e.g., conditions have changed; prior studies were conducted long ago, etc.].
• Describe the relationship each work has to the others under consideration that informs the reader why this case is applicable . Your literature review should include a description of any works that support using the case to investigate the research problem and the underlying research questions.
• Identify new ways to interpret prior research using the case study . If applicable, review any research that has examined the research problem using a different research design. Explain how your use of a case study design may reveal new knowledge or a new perspective or that can redirect research in an important new direction.
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies . This refers to synthesizing any literature that points to unresolved issues of concern about the research problem and describing how the subject of analysis that forms the case study can help resolve these existing contradictions.
• Point the way in fulfilling a need for additional research . Your review should examine any literature that lays a foundation for understanding why your case study design and the subject of analysis around which you have designed your study may reveal a new way of approaching the research problem or offer a perspective that points to the need for additional research.
• Expose any gaps that exist in the literature that the case study could help to fill . Summarize any literature that not only shows how your subject of analysis contributes to understanding the research problem, but how your case contributes to a new way of understanding the problem that prior research has failed to do.
• Locate your own research within the context of existing literature [very important!] . Collectively, your literature review should always place your case study within the larger domain of prior research about the problem. The overarching purpose of reviewing pertinent literature in a case study paper is to demonstrate that you have thoroughly identified and synthesized prior studies in relation to explaining the relevance of the case in addressing the research problem.

III.  Method

In this section, you explain why you selected a particular case [i.e., subject of analysis] and the strategy you used to identify and ultimately decide that your case was appropriate in addressing the research problem. The way you describe the methods used varies depending on the type of subject of analysis that constitutes your case study.

If your subject of analysis is an incident or event . In the social and behavioral sciences, the event or incident that represents the case to be studied is usually bounded by time and place, with a clear beginning and end and with an identifiable location or position relative to its surroundings. The subject of analysis can be a rare or critical event or it can focus on a typical or regular event. The purpose of studying a rare event is to illuminate new ways of thinking about the broader research problem or to test a hypothesis. Critical incident case studies must describe the method by which you identified the event and explain the process by which you determined the validity of this case to inform broader perspectives about the research problem or to reveal new findings. However, the event does not have to be a rare or uniquely significant to support new thinking about the research problem or to challenge an existing hypothesis. For example, Walo, Bull, and Breen conducted a case study to identify and evaluate the direct and indirect economic benefits and costs of a local sports event in the City of Lismore, New South Wales, Australia. The purpose of their study was to provide new insights from measuring the impact of a typical local sports event that prior studies could not measure well because they focused on large "mega-events." Whether the event is rare or not, the methods section should include an explanation of the following characteristics of the event: a) when did it take place; b) what were the underlying circumstances leading to the event; and, c) what were the consequences of the event in relation to the research problem.

If your subject of analysis is a person. Explain why you selected this particular individual to be studied and describe what experiences they have had that provide an opportunity to advance new understandings about the research problem. Mention any background about this person which might help the reader understand the significance of their experiences that make them worthy of study. This includes describing the relationships this person has had with other people, institutions, and/or events that support using them as the subject for a case study research paper. It is particularly important to differentiate the person as the subject of analysis from others and to succinctly explain how the person relates to examining the research problem [e.g., why is one politician in a particular local election used to show an increase in voter turnout from any other candidate running in the election]. Note that these issues apply to a specific group of people used as a case study unit of analysis [e.g., a classroom of students].

If your subject of analysis is a place. In general, a case study that investigates a place suggests a subject of analysis that is unique or special in some way and that this uniqueness can be used to build new understanding or knowledge about the research problem. A case study of a place must not only describe its various attributes relevant to the research problem [e.g., physical, social, historical, cultural, economic, political], but you must state the method by which you determined that this place will illuminate new understandings about the research problem. It is also important to articulate why a particular place as the case for study is being used if similar places also exist [i.e., if you are studying patterns of homeless encampments of veterans in open spaces, explain why you are studying Echo Park in Los Angeles rather than Griffith Park?]. If applicable, describe what type of human activity involving this place makes it a good choice to study [e.g., prior research suggests Echo Park has more homeless veterans].

If your subject of analysis is a phenomenon. A phenomenon refers to a fact, occurrence, or circumstance that can be studied or observed but with the cause or explanation to be in question. In this sense, a phenomenon that forms your subject of analysis can encompass anything that can be observed or presumed to exist but is not fully understood. In the social and behavioral sciences, the case usually focuses on human interaction within a complex physical, social, economic, cultural, or political system. For example, the phenomenon could be the observation that many vehicles used by ISIS fighters are small trucks with English language advertisements on them. The research problem could be that ISIS fighters are difficult to combat because they are highly mobile. The research questions could be how and by what means are these vehicles used by ISIS being supplied to the militants and how might supply lines to these vehicles be cut off? How might knowing the suppliers of these trucks reveal larger networks of collaborators and financial support? A case study of a phenomenon most often encompasses an in-depth analysis of a cause and effect that is grounded in an interactive relationship between people and their environment in some way.

NOTE:   The choice of the case or set of cases to study cannot appear random. Evidence that supports the method by which you identified and chose your subject of analysis should clearly support investigation of the research problem and linked to key findings from your literature review. Be sure to cite any studies that helped you determine that the case you chose was appropriate for examining the problem.

IV.  Discussion

The main elements of your discussion section are generally the same as any research paper, but centered around interpreting and drawing conclusions about the key findings from your analysis of the case study. Note that a general social sciences research paper may contain a separate section to report findings. However, in a paper designed around a case study, it is common to combine a description of the results with the discussion about their implications. The objectives of your discussion section should include the following:

Reiterate the Research Problem/State the Major Findings Briefly reiterate the research problem you are investigating and explain why the subject of analysis around which you designed the case study were used. You should then describe the findings revealed from your study of the case using direct, declarative, and succinct proclamation of the study results. Highlight any findings that were unexpected or especially profound.

Explain the Meaning of the Findings and Why They are Important Systematically explain the meaning of your case study findings and why you believe they are important. Begin this part of the section by repeating what you consider to be your most important or surprising finding first, then systematically review each finding. Be sure to thoroughly extrapolate what your analysis of the case can tell the reader about situations or conditions beyond the actual case that was studied while, at the same time, being careful not to misconstrue or conflate a finding that undermines the external validity of your conclusions.

Relate the Findings to Similar Studies No study in the social sciences is so novel or possesses such a restricted focus that it has absolutely no relation to previously published research. The discussion section should relate your case study results to those found in other studies, particularly if questions raised from prior studies served as the motivation for choosing your subject of analysis. This is important because comparing and contrasting the findings of other studies helps support the overall importance of your results and it highlights how and in what ways your case study design and the subject of analysis differs from prior research about the topic.

Consider Alternative Explanations of the Findings Remember that the purpose of social science research is to discover and not to prove. When writing the discussion section, you should carefully consider all possible explanations revealed by the case study results, rather than just those that fit your hypothesis or prior assumptions and biases. Be alert to what the in-depth analysis of the case may reveal about the research problem, including offering a contrarian perspective to what scholars have stated in prior research if that is how the findings can be interpreted from your case.

Acknowledge the Study's Limitations You can state the study's limitations in the conclusion section of your paper but describing the limitations of your subject of analysis in the discussion section provides an opportunity to identify the limitations and explain why they are not significant. This part of the discussion section should also note any unanswered questions or issues your case study could not address. More detailed information about how to document any limitations to your research can be found here .

Suggest Areas for Further Research Although your case study may offer important insights about the research problem, there are likely additional questions related to the problem that remain unanswered or findings that unexpectedly revealed themselves as a result of your in-depth analysis of the case. Be sure that the recommendations for further research are linked to the research problem and that you explain why your recommendations are valid in other contexts and based on the original assumptions of your study.

V.  Conclusion

As with any research paper, you should summarize your conclusion in clear, simple language; emphasize how the findings from your case study differs from or supports prior research and why. Do not simply reiterate the discussion section. Provide a synthesis of key findings presented in the paper to show how these converge to address the research problem. If you haven't already done so in the discussion section, be sure to document the limitations of your case study and any need for further research.

The function of your paper's conclusion is to: 1) reiterate the main argument supported by the findings from your case study; 2) state clearly the context, background, and necessity of pursuing the research problem using a case study design in relation to an issue, controversy, or a gap found from reviewing the literature; and, 3) provide a place to persuasively and succinctly restate the significance of your research problem, given that the reader has now been presented with in-depth information about the topic.

Consider the following points to help ensure your conclusion is appropriate:

• If the argument or purpose of your paper is complex, you may need to summarize these points for your reader.
• If prior to your conclusion, you have not yet explained the significance of your findings or if you are proceeding inductively, use the conclusion of your paper to describe your main points and explain their significance.
• Move from a detailed to a general level of consideration of the case study's findings that returns the topic to the context provided by the introduction or within a new context that emerges from your case study findings.

Note that, depending on the discipline you are writing in or the preferences of your professor, the concluding paragraph may contain your final reflections on the evidence presented as it applies to practice or on the essay's central research problem. However, the nature of being introspective about the subject of analysis you have investigated will depend on whether you are explicitly asked to express your observations in this way.

Problems to Avoid

Overgeneralization One of the goals of a case study is to lay a foundation for understanding broader trends and issues applied to similar circumstances. However, be careful when drawing conclusions from your case study. They must be evidence-based and grounded in the results of the study; otherwise, it is merely speculation. Looking at a prior example, it would be incorrect to state that a factor in improving girls access to education in Azerbaijan and the policy implications this may have for improving access in other Muslim nations is due to girls access to social media if there is no documentary evidence from your case study to indicate this. There may be anecdotal evidence that retention rates were better for girls who were engaged with social media, but this observation would only point to the need for further research and would not be a definitive finding if this was not a part of your original research agenda.

Failure to Document Limitations No case is going to reveal all that needs to be understood about a research problem. Therefore, just as you have to clearly state the limitations of a general research study , you must describe the specific limitations inherent in the subject of analysis. For example, the case of studying how women conceptualize the need for water conservation in a village in Uganda could have limited application in other cultural contexts or in areas where fresh water from rivers or lakes is plentiful and, therefore, conservation is understood more in terms of managing access rather than preserving access to a scarce resource.

Failure to Extrapolate All Possible Implications Just as you don't want to over-generalize from your case study findings, you also have to be thorough in the consideration of all possible outcomes or recommendations derived from your findings. If you do not, your reader may question the validity of your analysis, particularly if you failed to document an obvious outcome from your case study research. For example, in the case of studying the accident at the railroad crossing to evaluate where and what types of warning signals should be located, you failed to take into consideration speed limit signage as well as warning signals. When designing your case study, be sure you have thoroughly addressed all aspects of the problem and do not leave gaps in your analysis that leave the reader questioning the results.

Case Studies. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Gerring, John. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices . New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007; Merriam, Sharan B. Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education . Rev. ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1998; Miller, Lisa L. “The Use of Case Studies in Law and Social Science Research.” Annual Review of Law and Social Science 14 (2018): TBD; Mills, Albert J., Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010; Putney, LeAnn Grogan. "Case Study." In Encyclopedia of Research Design , Neil J. Salkind, editor. (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010), pp. 116-120; Simons, Helen. Case Study Research in Practice . London: SAGE Publications, 2009;  Kratochwill,  Thomas R. and Joel R. Levin, editors. Single-Case Research Design and Analysis: New Development for Psychology and Education .  Hilldsale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992; Swanborn, Peter G. Case Study Research: What, Why and How? London : SAGE, 2010; Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods . 6th edition. Los Angeles, CA, SAGE Publications, 2014; Walo, Maree, Adrian Bull, and Helen Breen. “Achieving Economic Benefits at Local Events: A Case Study of a Local Sports Event.” Festival Management and Event Tourism 4 (1996): 95-106.

Writing Tip

At Least Five Misconceptions about Case Study Research

Social science case studies are often perceived as limited in their ability to create new knowledge because they are not randomly selected and findings cannot be generalized to larger populations. Flyvbjerg examines five misunderstandings about case study research and systematically "corrects" each one. To quote, these are:

Misunderstanding 1 :  General, theoretical [context-independent] knowledge is more valuable than concrete, practical [context-dependent] knowledge. Misunderstanding 2 :  One cannot generalize on the basis of an individual case; therefore, the case study cannot contribute to scientific development. Misunderstanding 3 :  The case study is most useful for generating hypotheses; that is, in the first stage of a total research process, whereas other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building. Misunderstanding 4 :  The case study contains a bias toward verification, that is, a tendency to confirm the researcher’s preconceived notions. Misunderstanding 5 :  It is often difficult to summarize and develop general propositions and theories on the basis of specific case studies [p. 221].

While writing your paper, think introspectively about how you addressed these misconceptions because to do so can help you strengthen the validity and reliability of your research by clarifying issues of case selection, the testing and challenging of existing assumptions, the interpretation of key findings, and the summation of case outcomes. Think of a case study research paper as a complete, in-depth narrative about the specific properties and key characteristics of your subject of analysis applied to the research problem.

Flyvbjerg, Bent. “Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 12 (April 2006): 219-245.

• << Previous: Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Next: Writing a Field Report >>
• Last Updated: Jun 3, 2024 9:44 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

Research Writing and Analysis

• NVivo Group and Study Sessions
• SPSS This link opens in a new window
• Statistical Analysis Group sessions
• Using Qualtrics
• Dissertation and Data Analysis Group Sessions
• Defense Schedule - Commons Calendar This link opens in a new window
• Research Process Flow Chart
• Research Alignment Chapter 1 This link opens in a new window
• Step 1: Seek Out Evidence
• Step 2: Explain
• Step 3: The Big Picture
• Step 4: Own It
• Step 5: Illustrate
• Annotated Bibliography
• Literature Review This link opens in a new window
• Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses
• How to Synthesize and Analyze
• Synthesis and Analysis Practice
• Synthesis and Analysis Group Sessions
• Problem Statement
• Purpose Statement
• Conceptual Framework
• Theoretical Framework
• Locating Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks This link opens in a new window
• Quantitative Research Questions
• Qualitative Research Questions
• Trustworthiness of Qualitative Data
• Analysis and Coding Example- Qualitative Data
• Thematic Data Analysis in Qualitative Design
• Dissertation to Journal Article This link opens in a new window
• International Journal of Online Graduate Education (IJOGE) This link opens in a new window
• Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning (JRIT&L) This link opens in a new window

Writing a Case Study

What is a case study?

A Case study is: 

• An in-depth research design that primarily uses a qualitative methodology but sometimes​​ includes quantitative methodology.
• Used to examine an identifiable problem confirmed through research.
• Used to investigate an individual, group of people, organization, or event.
• Used to mostly answer "how" and "why" questions.

What are the different types of case studies?

Note: These are the primary case studies. As you continue to research and learn

about case studies you will begin to find a robust list of different types. 

Who are your case study participants?

What is triangulation ? 

Validity and credibility are an essential part of the case study. Therefore, the researcher should include triangulation to ensure trustworthiness while accurately reflecting what the researcher seeks to investigate.

How to write a Case Study?

When developing a case study, there are different ways you could present the information, but remember to include the five parts for your case study.

Was this resource helpful?

• << Previous: Thematic Data Analysis in Qualitative Design
• Next: Journal Article Reporting Standards (JARS) >>
• Last Updated: May 29, 2024 8:05 AM
• URL: https://resources.nu.edu/researchtools

• Privacy Policy

Home » Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Table of Contents

A case study is a research method that involves an in-depth examination and analysis of a particular phenomenon or case, such as an individual, organization, community, event, or situation.

It is a qualitative research approach that aims to provide a detailed and comprehensive understanding of the case being studied. Case studies typically involve multiple sources of data, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts, which are analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, and grounded theory. The findings of a case study are often used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Types of Case Study

Types and Methods of Case Study are as follows:

Single-Case Study

A single-case study is an in-depth analysis of a single case. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand a specific phenomenon in detail.

For Example , A researcher might conduct a single-case study on a particular individual to understand their experiences with a particular health condition or a specific organization to explore their management practices. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a single-case study are often used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Multiple-Case Study

A multiple-case study involves the analysis of several cases that are similar in nature. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to identify similarities and differences between the cases.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a multiple-case study on several companies to explore the factors that contribute to their success or failure. The researcher collects data from each case, compares and contrasts the findings, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as comparative analysis or pattern-matching. The findings of a multiple-case study can be used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Exploratory Case Study

An exploratory case study is used to explore a new or understudied phenomenon. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to generate hypotheses or theories about the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an exploratory case study on a new technology to understand its potential impact on society. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as grounded theory or content analysis. The findings of an exploratory case study can be used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Descriptive Case Study

A descriptive case study is used to describe a particular phenomenon in detail. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to provide a comprehensive account of the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a descriptive case study on a particular community to understand its social and economic characteristics. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a descriptive case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Instrumental Case Study

An instrumental case study is used to understand a particular phenomenon that is instrumental in achieving a particular goal. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand the role of the phenomenon in achieving the goal.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an instrumental case study on a particular policy to understand its impact on achieving a particular goal, such as reducing poverty. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of an instrumental case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Case Study Data Collection Methods

Here are some common data collection methods for case studies:

Interviews involve asking questions to individuals who have knowledge or experience relevant to the case study. Interviews can be structured (where the same questions are asked to all participants) or unstructured (where the interviewer follows up on the responses with further questions). Interviews can be conducted in person, over the phone, or through video conferencing.

Observations

Observations involve watching and recording the behavior and activities of individuals or groups relevant to the case study. Observations can be participant (where the researcher actively participates in the activities) or non-participant (where the researcher observes from a distance). Observations can be recorded using notes, audio or video recordings, or photographs.

Documents can be used as a source of information for case studies. Documents can include reports, memos, emails, letters, and other written materials related to the case study. Documents can be collected from the case study participants or from public sources.

Surveys involve asking a set of questions to a sample of individuals relevant to the case study. Surveys can be administered in person, over the phone, through mail or email, or online. Surveys can be used to gather information on attitudes, opinions, or behaviors related to the case study.

Artifacts are physical objects relevant to the case study. Artifacts can include tools, equipment, products, or other objects that provide insights into the case study phenomenon.

How to conduct Case Study Research

Conducting a case study research involves several steps that need to be followed to ensure the quality and rigor of the study. Here are the steps to conduct case study research:

• Define the research questions: The first step in conducting a case study research is to define the research questions. The research questions should be specific, measurable, and relevant to the case study phenomenon under investigation.
• Select the case: The next step is to select the case or cases to be studied. The case should be relevant to the research questions and should provide rich and diverse data that can be used to answer the research questions.
• Collect data: Data can be collected using various methods, such as interviews, observations, documents, surveys, and artifacts. The data collection method should be selected based on the research questions and the nature of the case study phenomenon.
• Analyze the data: The data collected from the case study should be analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, or grounded theory. The analysis should be guided by the research questions and should aim to provide insights and conclusions relevant to the research questions.
• Draw conclusions: The conclusions drawn from the case study should be based on the data analysis and should be relevant to the research questions. The conclusions should be supported by evidence and should be clearly stated.
• Validate the findings: The findings of the case study should be validated by reviewing the data and the analysis with participants or other experts in the field. This helps to ensure the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Write the report: The final step is to write the report of the case study research. The report should provide a clear description of the case study phenomenon, the research questions, the data collection methods, the data analysis, the findings, and the conclusions. The report should be written in a clear and concise manner and should follow the guidelines for academic writing.

Examples of Case Study

Here are some examples of case study research:

• The Hawthorne Studies : Conducted between 1924 and 1932, the Hawthorne Studies were a series of case studies conducted by Elton Mayo and his colleagues to examine the impact of work environment on employee productivity. The studies were conducted at the Hawthorne Works plant of the Western Electric Company in Chicago and included interviews, observations, and experiments.
• The Stanford Prison Experiment: Conducted in 1971, the Stanford Prison Experiment was a case study conducted by Philip Zimbardo to examine the psychological effects of power and authority. The study involved simulating a prison environment and assigning participants to the role of guards or prisoners. The study was controversial due to the ethical issues it raised.
• The Challenger Disaster: The Challenger Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Space Shuttle Challenger explosion in 1986. The study included interviews, observations, and analysis of data to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.
• The Enron Scandal: The Enron Scandal was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Enron Corporation’s bankruptcy in 2001. The study included interviews, analysis of financial data, and review of documents to identify the accounting practices, corporate culture, and ethical issues that led to the company’s downfall.
• The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster : The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the nuclear accident that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan in 2011. The study included interviews, analysis of data, and review of documents to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.

Application of Case Study

Case studies have a wide range of applications across various fields and industries. Here are some examples:

Business and Management

Case studies are widely used in business and management to examine real-life situations and develop problem-solving skills. Case studies can help students and professionals to develop a deep understanding of business concepts, theories, and best practices.

Case studies are used in healthcare to examine patient care, treatment options, and outcomes. Case studies can help healthcare professionals to develop critical thinking skills, diagnose complex medical conditions, and develop effective treatment plans.

Case studies are used in education to examine teaching and learning practices. Case studies can help educators to develop effective teaching strategies, evaluate student progress, and identify areas for improvement.

Social Sciences

Case studies are widely used in social sciences to examine human behavior, social phenomena, and cultural practices. Case studies can help researchers to develop theories, test hypotheses, and gain insights into complex social issues.

Law and Ethics

Case studies are used in law and ethics to examine legal and ethical dilemmas. Case studies can help lawyers, policymakers, and ethical professionals to develop critical thinking skills, analyze complex cases, and make informed decisions.

Purpose of Case Study

The purpose of a case study is to provide a detailed analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. A case study is a qualitative research method that involves the in-depth exploration and analysis of a particular case, which can be an individual, group, organization, event, or community.

The primary purpose of a case study is to generate a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the case, including its history, context, and dynamics. Case studies can help researchers to identify and examine the underlying factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and detailed understanding of the case, which can inform future research, practice, or policy.

Case studies can also serve other purposes, including:

• Illustrating a theory or concept: Case studies can be used to illustrate and explain theoretical concepts and frameworks, providing concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Developing hypotheses: Case studies can help to generate hypotheses about the causal relationships between different factors and outcomes, which can be tested through further research.
• Providing insight into complex issues: Case studies can provide insights into complex and multifaceted issues, which may be difficult to understand through other research methods.
• Informing practice or policy: Case studies can be used to inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.

Advantages of Case Study Research

There are several advantages of case study research, including:

• In-depth exploration: Case study research allows for a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. This can provide a comprehensive understanding of the case and its dynamics, which may not be possible through other research methods.
• Rich data: Case study research can generate rich and detailed data, including qualitative data such as interviews, observations, and documents. This can provide a nuanced understanding of the case and its complexity.
• Holistic perspective: Case study research allows for a holistic perspective of the case, taking into account the various factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the case.
• Theory development: Case study research can help to develop and refine theories and concepts by providing empirical evidence and concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Practical application: Case study research can inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.
• Contextualization: Case study research takes into account the specific context in which the case is situated, which can help to understand how the case is influenced by the social, cultural, and historical factors of its environment.

Limitations of Case Study Research

There are several limitations of case study research, including:

• Limited generalizability : Case studies are typically focused on a single case or a small number of cases, which limits the generalizability of the findings. The unique characteristics of the case may not be applicable to other contexts or populations, which may limit the external validity of the research.
• Biased sampling: Case studies may rely on purposive or convenience sampling, which can introduce bias into the sample selection process. This may limit the representativeness of the sample and the generalizability of the findings.
• Subjectivity: Case studies rely on the interpretation of the researcher, which can introduce subjectivity into the analysis. The researcher’s own biases, assumptions, and perspectives may influence the findings, which may limit the objectivity of the research.
• Limited control: Case studies are typically conducted in naturalistic settings, which limits the control that the researcher has over the environment and the variables being studied. This may limit the ability to establish causal relationships between variables.
• Time-consuming: Case studies can be time-consuming to conduct, as they typically involve a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific case. This may limit the feasibility of conducting multiple case studies or conducting case studies in a timely manner.
• Resource-intensive: Case studies may require significant resources, including time, funding, and expertise. This may limit the ability of researchers to conduct case studies in resource-constrained settings.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Phenomenology – Methods, Examples and Guide

Research Methods – Types, Examples and Guide

Observational Research – Methods and Guide

Descriptive Research Design – Types, Methods and...

Correlational Research – Methods, Types and...

Exploratory Research – Types, Methods and...

What Is a Case Study and Why You Should Use Them

Case studies can provide more insights into your business while helping you conduct further research with robust qualitative data analysis to learn more.

If you're in charge of running a company, then you're likely always looking for new ways to run your business more efficiently and increase your customer base while streamlining as many processes as possible.

Unfortunately, it can sometimes be difficult to determine how to go about implementing the proper program in order to be successful. This is why many business owners opt to conduct a case study, which can help significantly. Whether you've been struggling with brand consistency or some other problem, the right case study can identify why your problem exists as well as provide a way to rectify it.

A case study is a great tool that many businesses aren't even aware exists, and there are marketing experts like Mailchimp who can provide you with step-by-step assistance with implementing a plan with a case study. Many companies discover that not only do they need to start a blog in order to improve business, but they also need to create specific and relevant blog titles.

If your company already has a blog, then optimizing your blog posts may be helpful. Regardless of the obstacles that are preventing you from achieving all your professional goals, a case study can work wonders in helping you reverse this issue.

What is a case study?

A case study is a comprehensive report of the results of theory testing or examining emerging themes of a business in real life context. Case studies are also often used in the healthcare industry, conducting health services research with primary research interest around routinely collected healthcare data.

However, for businesses, the purpose of a case study is to help small business owners or company leaders identify the issues and conduct further research into what may be preventing success through information collection, client or customer interviews, and in-depth data analysis.

Knowing the case study definition is crucial for any business owner. By identifying the issues that are hindering a company from achieving all its goals, it's easier to make the necessary corrections to promote success through influenced data collection.

Why are case studies important?

Now that we've answered the questions, "what is a case study?" Why are case studies important? Some of the top reasons why case studies are important include:

• Understand complex issues: Even after you conduct a significant amount of market research , you might have a difficult time understanding exactly what it means. While you might have the basics down, conducting a case study can help you see how that information is applied. Then, when you see how the information can make a difference in business decisions, it could make it easier to understand complex issues.
• Collect data: A case study can also help with data tracking . A case study is a data collection method that can help you describe the information that you have available to you. Then, you can present that information in a way the reader can understand.
• Conduct evaluations: As you learn more about how to write a case study, remember that you can also use a case study to conduct evaluations of a specific situation. A case study is a great way to learn more about complex situations, and you can evaluate how various people responded in that situation. By conducting a case study evaluation, you can learn more about what has worked well, what has not, and what you might want to change in the future.
• Identify potential solutions: A case study can also help you identify solutions to potential problems. If you have an issue in your business that you are trying to solve, you may be able to take a look at a case study where someone has dealt with a similar situation in the past. For example, you may uncover data bias in a specific solution that you would like to address when you tackle the issue on your own. If you need help solving a difficult problem, a case study may be able to help you.

Remember that you can also use case studies to target your audience . If you want to show your audience that you have a significant level of expertise in a field, you may want to publish some case studies that you have handled in the past. Then, when your audience sees that you have had success in a specific area, they may be more likely to provide you with their business. In essence, case studies can be looked at as the original method of social proof, showcasing exactly how you can help someone solve their problems.

What are the benefits of writing a business case study?

Although writing a case study can seem like a tedious task, there are many benefits to conducting one through an in depth qualitative research process.

• Industry understanding: First of all, a case study can give you an in-depth understanding of your industry through a particular conceptual framework and help you identify hidden problems that are preventing you from transcending into the business world.
• Develop theories: If you decide to write a business case study, it provides you with an opportunity to develop new theories. You might have a theory about how to solve a specific problem, but you need to write a business case study to see exactly how that theory has unfolded in the past. Then, you can figure out if you want to apply your theory to a similar issue in the future.
• Evaluate interventions: When you write a business case study that focuses on a specific situation you have been through in the past, you can uncover whether that intervention was truly helpful. This can make it easier to figure out whether you want to use the same intervention in a similar situation in the future.
• Identify best practices: If you want to stay on top of the best practices in your field, conducting case studies can help by allowing you to identify patterns and trends and develop a new list of best practices that you can follow in the future.
• Versatility: Writing a case study also provides you with more versatility. If you want to expand your business applications, you need to figure out how you respond to various problems. When you run a business case study, you open the door to new opportunities, new applications, and new techniques that could help you make a difference in your business down the road.
• Solve problems: Writing a great case study can dramatically improve your chances of reversing your problem and improving your business.
• These are just a few of the biggest benefits you might experience if you decide to publish your case studies. They can be an effective tool for learning, showcasing your talents, and teaching some of your other employees. If you want to grow your audience , you may want to consider publishing some case studies.

What are the limitations of case studies?

Case studies can be a wonderful tool for any business of any size to use to gain an in-depth understanding of their clients, products, customers, or services, but there are limitations.

One limitation of case studies is the fact that, unless there are other recently published examples, there is nothing to compare them to since, most of the time, you are conducting a single, not multiple, case studies.

Another limitation is the fact that most case studies can lack scientific evidence.

Types of case studies

There are specific types of case studies to choose from, and each specific type will yield different results. Some case study types even overlap, which is sometimes more favorable, as they provide even more pertinent data.

Here are overviews of the different types of case studies, each with its own theoretical framework, so you can determine which type would be most effective for helping you meet your goals.

Explanatory case studies

Explanatory case studies are pretty straightforward, as they're not difficult to interpret. This type of case study is best if there aren't many variables involved because explanatory case studies can easily answer questions like "how" and "why" through theory development.

Exploratory case studies

An exploratory case study does exactly what its name implies: it goes into specific detail about the topic at hand in a natural, real-life context with qualitative research.

The benefits of exploratory case studies are limitless, with the main one being that it offers a great deal of flexibility. Having flexibility when writing a case study is important because you can't always predict what obstacles might arise during the qualitative research process.

Collective case studies

Collective case studies require you to study many different individuals in order to obtain usable data.

Case studies that involve an investigation of people will involve many different variables, all of which can't be predicted. Despite this fact, there are many benefits of collective case studies, including the fact that it allows an ongoing analysis of the data collected.

Intrinsic case studies

This type of study differs from the others as it focuses on the inquiry of one specific instance among many possibilities.

Many people prefer these types of case studies because it allows them to learn about the particular instance that they wish to investigate further.

Instrumental case studies

An instrumental case study is similar to an intrinsic one, as it focuses on a particular instance, whether it's a person, organization, or something different.

One thing that differentiates instrumental case studies from intrinsic ones is the fact that instrumental case studies aren't chosen merely because a person is interested in learning about a specific instance.

Tips for writing a case study

If you have decided to write case studies for your company, then you may be unsure of where to start or which type to conduct.

However, it doesn't have to be difficult or confusing to begin conducting a case study that will help you identify ways to improve your business.

Here are some helpful tips for writing your case studies:

1. Your case study must be written in the proper format

When writing a case study, the format that you should be similar to this:

Administrative summary

The executive summary is an overview of what your report will contain, written in a concise manner while providing real-life context.

Despite the fact that the executive summary should appear at the beginning of your case studies, it shouldn't be written until you've completed the entire report because if you write it before you finish the report, this summary may not be completely accurate.

Key problem statement

In this section of your case study, you will briefly describe the problem that you hope to solve by conducting the study. You will have the opportunity to elaborate on the problem that you're focusing on as you get into the breadth of the report.

Problem exploration

This part of the case study isn't as brief as the other two, and it goes into more detail about the problem at hand. Your problem exploration must include why the identified problem needs to be solved as well as the urgency of solving it.

Additionally, it must include justification for conducting the problem-solving, as the benefits must outweigh the efforts and costs.

Proposed resolution

This case study section will also be lengthier than the first two. It must include how you propose going about rectifying the problem. The "recommended solution" section must also include potential obstacles that you might experience, as well as how these will be managed.

Furthermore, you will need to list alternative solutions and explain the reason the chosen solution is best. Charts can enhance your report and make it easier to read, and provide as much proof to substantiate your claim as possible.

Overview of monetary consideration

An overview of monetary consideration is essential for all case studies, as it will be used to convince all involved parties why your project should be funded. You must successfully convince them that the cost is worth the investment it will require. It's important that you stress the necessity for this particular case study and explain the expected outcome.

Execution timeline

In the execution times of case studies, you explain how long you predict it will take to implement your study. The shorter the time it will take to implement your plan, the more apt it is to be approved. However, be sure to provide a reasonable timeline, taking into consideration any additional time that might be needed due to obstacles.

Always include a conclusion in your case study. This is where you will briefly wrap up your entire proposal, stressing the benefits of completing the data collection and data analysis in order to rectify your problem.

2. Make it clear and comprehensive

You want to write your case studies with as much clarity as possible so that every aspect of the report is understood. Be sure to double-check your grammar, spelling, punctuation, and more, as you don't want to submit a poorly-written document.

Not only would a poorly-written case study fail to prove that what you are trying to achieve is important, but it would also increase the chances that your report will be tossed aside and not taken seriously.

3. Don't rush through the process

Writing the perfect case study takes time and patience. Rushing could result in your forgetting to include information that is crucial to your entire study. Don't waste your time creating a study that simply isn't ready. Take the necessary time to perform all the research necessary to write the best case study possible.

Depending on the case study, conducting case study research could mean using qualitative methods, quantitative methods, or both. Qualitative research questions focus on non-numerical data, such as how people feel, their beliefs, their experiences, and so on.

Meanwhile, quantitative research questions focus on numerical or statistical data collection to explain causal links or get an in-depth picture.

It is also important to collect insightful and constructive feedback. This will help you better understand the outcome as well as any changes you need to make to future case studies. Consider using formal and informal ways to collect feedback to ensure that you get a range of opinions and perspectives.

4. Be confident in your theory development

While writing your case study or conducting your formal experimental investigation, you should have confidence in yourself and what you're proposing in your report. If you took the time to gather all the pertinent data collected to complete the report, don't second-guess yourself or doubt your abilities. If you believe your report will be amazing, then it likely will be.

5. Case studies and all qualitative research are long

It's expected that multiple case studies are going to be incredibly boring, and there is no way around this. However, it doesn't mean you can choose your language carefully in order to keep your audience as engaged as possible.

If your audience loses interest in your case study at the beginning, for whatever reason, then this increases the likelihood that your case study will not be funded.

Case study examples

If you want to learn more about how to write a case study, it might be beneficial to take a look at a few case study examples. Below are a few interesting case study examples you may want to take a closer look at.

• Phineas Gage by John Martin Marlow : One of the most famous case studies comes from the medical field, and it is about the story of Phineas Gage, a man who had a railroad spike driven through his head in 1848. As he was working on a railroad, an explosive charge went off prematurely, sending a railroad rod through his head. Even though he survived this incident, he lost his left eye. However, Phineas Gage was studied extensively over the years because his experiences had a significant, lasting impact on his personality. This served as a case study because his injury showed different parts of the brain have different functions.
• Kitty Genovese and the bystander effect : This is a tragic case study that discusses the murder of Kitty Genovese, a woman attacked and murdered in Queens, New York City. Shockingly, while numerous neighbors watched the scene, nobody called for help because they assumed someone else would. This case study helped to define the bystander effect, which is when a person fails to intervene during an emergency because other people are around.
• Henry Molaison and the study of memory : Henry Molaison lost his memory and suffered from debilitating amnesia. He suffered from childhood epilepsy, and medical professionals attempted to remove the part of his brain that was causing his seizures. He had a portion of his brain removed, but it completely took away his ability to hold memories. Even though he went on to live until the age of 82, he was always forced to live in the present moment, as he was completely unable to form new memories.

Case study FAQs

When should you do a case study.

There are several scenarios when conducting a case study can be beneficial. Case studies are often used when there's a "why" or "how" question that needs to be answered. Case studies are also beneficial when trying to understand a complex phenomenon, there's limited research on a topic, or when you're looking for practical solutions to a problem.

How can case study results be used to make business decisions?

You can use the results from a case study to make future business decisions if you find yourself in a similar situation. As you assess the results of a case study, you can identify best practices, evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention, generate new and creative ideas, or get a better understanding of customer needs.

How are case studies different from other research methodologies?

When compared to other research methodologies, such as experimental or qualitative research methodology, a case study does not require a representative sample. For example, if you are performing quantitative research, you have a lot of subjects that expand your sample size. If you are performing experimental research, you may have a random sample in front of you. A case study is usually designed to deliberately focus on unusual situations, which allows it to shed new light on a specific business research problem.

Writing multiple case studies for your business

If you're feeling overwhelmed by the idea of writing a case study and it seems completely foreign, then you aren't alone. Writing a case study for a business is a very big deal, but fortunately, there is help available because an example of a case study doesn't always help.

Mailchimp, a well-known marketing company that provides comprehensive marketing support for all sorts of businesses, can assist you with your case study, or you can review one of their own recently published examples.

Mailchimp can assist you with developing the most effective content strategy to increase your chances of being as successful as possible. Mailchimp's content studio is a great tool that can help your business immensely.

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

What Is a Case Study?

Weighing the pros and cons of this method of research

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Cara Lustik is a fact-checker and copywriter.

Verywell / Colleen Tighe

• Pros and Cons

What Types of Case Studies Are Out There?

Where do you find data for a case study, how do i write a psychology case study.

A case study is an in-depth study of one person, group, or event. In a case study, nearly every aspect of the subject's life and history is analyzed to seek patterns and causes of behavior. Case studies can be used in many different fields, including psychology, medicine, education, anthropology, political science, and social work.

The point of a case study is to learn as much as possible about an individual or group so that the information can be generalized to many others. Unfortunately, case studies tend to be highly subjective, and it is sometimes difficult to generalize results to a larger population.

While case studies focus on a single individual or group, they follow a format similar to other types of psychology writing. If you are writing a case study, we got you—here are some rules of APA format to reference.  

At a Glance

A case study, or an in-depth study of a person, group, or event, can be a useful research tool when used wisely. In many cases, case studies are best used in situations where it would be difficult or impossible for you to conduct an experiment. They are helpful for looking at unique situations and allow researchers to gather a lot of˜ information about a specific individual or group of people. However, it's important to be cautious of any bias we draw from them as they are highly subjective.

What Are the Benefits and Limitations of Case Studies?

A case study can have its strengths and weaknesses. Researchers must consider these pros and cons before deciding if this type of study is appropriate for their needs.

One of the greatest advantages of a case study is that it allows researchers to investigate things that are often difficult or impossible to replicate in a lab. Some other benefits of a case study:

• Allows researchers to capture information on the 'how,' 'what,' and 'why,' of something that's implemented
• Gives researchers the chance to collect information on why one strategy might be chosen over another
• Permits researchers to develop hypotheses that can be explored in experimental research

On the other hand, a case study can have some drawbacks:

• It cannot necessarily be generalized to the larger population
• Cannot demonstrate cause and effect
• It may not be scientifically rigorous
• It can lead to bias

Researchers may choose to perform a case study if they want to explore a unique or recently discovered phenomenon. Through their insights, researchers develop additional ideas and study questions that might be explored in future studies.

It's important to remember that the insights from case studies cannot be used to determine cause-and-effect relationships between variables. However, case studies may be used to develop hypotheses that can then be addressed in experimental research.

Case Study Examples

There have been a number of notable case studies in the history of psychology. Much of  Freud's work and theories were developed through individual case studies. Some great examples of case studies in psychology include:

• Anna O : Anna O. was a pseudonym of a woman named Bertha Pappenheim, a patient of a physician named Josef Breuer. While she was never a patient of Freud's, Freud and Breuer discussed her case extensively. The woman was experiencing symptoms of a condition that was then known as hysteria and found that talking about her problems helped relieve her symptoms. Her case played an important part in the development of talk therapy as an approach to mental health treatment.
• Phineas Gage : Phineas Gage was a railroad employee who experienced a terrible accident in which an explosion sent a metal rod through his skull, damaging important portions of his brain. Gage recovered from his accident but was left with serious changes in both personality and behavior.
• Genie : Genie was a young girl subjected to horrific abuse and isolation. The case study of Genie allowed researchers to study whether language learning was possible, even after missing critical periods for language development. Her case also served as an example of how scientific research may interfere with treatment and lead to further abuse of vulnerable individuals.

Such cases demonstrate how case research can be used to study things that researchers could not replicate in experimental settings. In Genie's case, her horrific abuse denied her the opportunity to learn a language at critical points in her development.

This is clearly not something researchers could ethically replicate, but conducting a case study on Genie allowed researchers to study phenomena that are otherwise impossible to reproduce.

There are a few different types of case studies that psychologists and other researchers might use:

• Collective case studies : These involve studying a group of individuals. Researchers might study a group of people in a certain setting or look at an entire community. For example, psychologists might explore how access to resources in a community has affected the collective mental well-being of those who live there.
• Descriptive case studies : These involve starting with a descriptive theory. The subjects are then observed, and the information gathered is compared to the pre-existing theory.
• Explanatory case studies : These   are often used to do causal investigations. In other words, researchers are interested in looking at factors that may have caused certain things to occur.
• Exploratory case studies : These are sometimes used as a prelude to further, more in-depth research. This allows researchers to gather more information before developing their research questions and hypotheses .
• Instrumental case studies : These occur when the individual or group allows researchers to understand more than what is initially obvious to observers.
• Intrinsic case studies : This type of case study is when the researcher has a personal interest in the case. Jean Piaget's observations of his own children are good examples of how an intrinsic case study can contribute to the development of a psychological theory.

The three main case study types often used are intrinsic, instrumental, and collective. Intrinsic case studies are useful for learning about unique cases. Instrumental case studies help look at an individual to learn more about a broader issue. A collective case study can be useful for looking at several cases simultaneously.

The type of case study that psychology researchers use depends on the unique characteristics of the situation and the case itself.

There are a number of different sources and methods that researchers can use to gather information about an individual or group. Six major sources that have been identified by researchers are:

• Archival records : Census records, survey records, and name lists are examples of archival records.
• Direct observation : This strategy involves observing the subject, often in a natural setting . While an individual observer is sometimes used, it is more common to utilize a group of observers.
• Documents : Letters, newspaper articles, administrative records, etc., are the types of documents often used as sources.
• Interviews : Interviews are one of the most important methods for gathering information in case studies. An interview can involve structured survey questions or more open-ended questions.
• Participant observation : When the researcher serves as a participant in events and observes the actions and outcomes, it is called participant observation.
• Physical artifacts : Tools, objects, instruments, and other artifacts are often observed during a direct observation of the subject.

If you have been directed to write a case study for a psychology course, be sure to check with your instructor for any specific guidelines you need to follow. If you are writing your case study for a professional publication, check with the publisher for their specific guidelines for submitting a case study.

Here is a general outline of what should be included in a case study.

Section 1: A Case History

This section will have the following structure and content:

Background information : The first section of your paper will present your client's background. Include factors such as age, gender, work, health status, family mental health history, family and social relationships, drug and alcohol history, life difficulties, goals, and coping skills and weaknesses.

Description of the presenting problem : In the next section of your case study, you will describe the problem or symptoms that the client presented with.

Describe any physical, emotional, or sensory symptoms reported by the client. Thoughts, feelings, and perceptions related to the symptoms should also be noted. Any screening or diagnostic assessments that are used should also be described in detail and all scores reported.

Your diagnosis : Provide your diagnosis and give the appropriate Diagnostic and Statistical Manual code. Explain how you reached your diagnosis, how the client's symptoms fit the diagnostic criteria for the disorder(s), or any possible difficulties in reaching a diagnosis.

Section 2: Treatment Plan

This portion of the paper will address the chosen treatment for the condition. This might also include the theoretical basis for the chosen treatment or any other evidence that might exist to support why this approach was chosen.

• Cognitive behavioral approach : Explain how a cognitive behavioral therapist would approach treatment. Offer background information on cognitive behavioral therapy and describe the treatment sessions, client response, and outcome of this type of treatment. Make note of any difficulties or successes encountered by your client during treatment.
• Humanistic approach : Describe a humanistic approach that could be used to treat your client, such as client-centered therapy . Provide information on the type of treatment you chose, the client's reaction to the treatment, and the end result of this approach. Explain why the treatment was successful or unsuccessful.
• Psychoanalytic approach : Describe how a psychoanalytic therapist would view the client's problem. Provide some background on the psychoanalytic approach and cite relevant references. Explain how psychoanalytic therapy would be used to treat the client, how the client would respond to therapy, and the effectiveness of this treatment approach.
• Pharmacological approach : If treatment primarily involves the use of medications, explain which medications were used and why. Provide background on the effectiveness of these medications and how monotherapy may compare with an approach that combines medications with therapy or other treatments.

This section of a case study should also include information about the treatment goals, process, and outcomes.

When you are writing a case study, you should also include a section where you discuss the case study itself, including the strengths and limitiations of the study. You should note how the findings of your case study might support previous research. 

In your discussion section, you should also describe some of the implications of your case study. What ideas or findings might require further exploration? How might researchers go about exploring some of these questions in additional studies?

Need More Tips?

Here are a few additional pointers to keep in mind when formatting your case study:

• Never refer to the subject of your case study as "the client." Instead, use their name or a pseudonym.
• Read examples of case studies to gain an idea about the style and format.
• Remember to use APA format when citing references .

Crowe S, Cresswell K, Robertson A, Huby G, Avery A, Sheikh A. The case study approach .  BMC Med Res Methodol . 2011;11:100.

Crowe S, Cresswell K, Robertson A, Huby G, Avery A, Sheikh A. The case study approach . BMC Med Res Methodol . 2011 Jun 27;11:100. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Gagnon, Yves-Chantal.  The Case Study as Research Method: A Practical Handbook . Canada, Chicago Review Press Incorporated DBA Independent Pub Group, 2010.

Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods . United States, SAGE Publications, 2017.

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

How to write a case study — examples, templates, and tools

It’s a marketer’s job to communicate the effectiveness of a product or service to potential and current customers to convince them to buy and keep business moving. One of the best methods for doing this is to share success stories that are relatable to prospects and customers based on their pain points, experiences, and overall needs.

That’s where case studies come in. Case studies are an essential part of a content marketing plan. These in-depth stories of customer experiences are some of the most effective at demonstrating the value of a product or service. Yet many marketers don’t use them, whether because of their regimented formats or the process of customer involvement and approval.

A case study is a powerful tool for showcasing your hard work and the success your customer achieved. But writing a great case study can be difficult if you’ve never done it before or if it’s been a while. This guide will show you how to write an effective case study and provide real-world examples and templates that will keep readers engaged and support your business.

In this article, you’ll learn:

What is a case study?

How to write a case study, case study templates, case study examples, case study tools.

A case study is the detailed story of a customer’s experience with a product or service that demonstrates their success and often includes measurable outcomes. Case studies are used in a range of fields and for various reasons, from business to academic research. They’re especially impactful in marketing as brands work to convince and convert consumers with relatable, real-world stories of actual customer experiences.

The best case studies tell the story of a customer’s success, including the steps they took, the results they achieved, and the support they received from a brand along the way. To write a great case study, you need to:

• Celebrate the customer and make them — not a product or service — the star of the story.
• Craft the story with specific audiences or target segments in mind so that the story of one customer will be viewed as relatable and actionable for another customer.
• Write copy that is easy to read and engaging so that readers will gain the insights and messages intended.
• Follow a standardized format that includes all of the essentials a potential customer would find interesting and useful.
• Support all of the claims for success made in the story with data in the forms of hard numbers and customer statements.

Case studies are a type of review but more in depth, aiming to show — rather than just tell — the positive experiences that customers have with a brand. Notably, 89% of consumers read reviews before deciding to buy, and 79% view case study content as part of their purchasing process. When it comes to B2B sales, 52% of buyers rank case studies as an important part of their evaluation process.

Telling a brand story through the experience of a tried-and-true customer matters. The story is relatable to potential new customers as they imagine themselves in the shoes of the company or individual featured in the case study. Showcasing previous customers can help new ones see themselves engaging with your brand in the ways that are most meaningful to them.

Besides sharing the perspective of another customer, case studies stand out from other content marketing forms because they are based on evidence. Whether pulling from client testimonials or data-driven results, case studies tend to have more impact on new business because the story contains information that is both objective (data) and subjective (customer experience) — and the brand doesn’t sound too self-promotional.

Case studies are unique in that there’s a fairly standardized format for telling a customer’s story. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t room for creativity. It’s all about making sure that teams are clear on the goals for the case study — along with strategies for supporting content and channels — and understanding how the story fits within the framework of the company’s overall marketing goals.

Here are the basic steps to writing a good case study.

1. Identify your goal

Start by defining exactly who your case study will be designed to help. Case studies are about specific instances where a company works with a customer to achieve a goal. Identify which customers are likely to have these goals, as well as other needs the story should cover to appeal to them.

The answer is often found in one of the buyer personas that have been constructed as part of your larger marketing strategy. This can include anything from new leads generated by the marketing team to long-term customers that are being pressed for cross-sell opportunities. In all of these cases, demonstrating value through a relatable customer success story can be part of the solution to conversion.

2. Choose your client or subject

Who you highlight matters. Case studies tie brands together that might otherwise not cross paths. A writer will want to ensure that the highlighted customer aligns with their own company’s brand identity and offerings. Look for a customer with positive name recognition who has had great success with a product or service and is willing to be an advocate.

The client should also match up with the identified target audience. Whichever company or individual is selected should be a reflection of other potential customers who can see themselves in similar circumstances, having the same problems and possible solutions.

Some of the most compelling case studies feature customers who:

• Switch from one product or service to another while naming competitors that missed the mark.
• Experience measurable results that are relatable to others in a specific industry.
• Represent well-known brands and recognizable names that are likely to compel action.
• Advocate for a product or service as a champion and are well-versed in its advantages.

Whoever or whatever customer is selected, marketers must ensure they have the permission of the company involved before getting started. Some brands have strict review and approval procedures for any official marketing or promotional materials that include their name. Acquiring those approvals in advance will prevent any miscommunication or wasted effort if there is an issue with their legal or compliance teams.

3. Conduct research and compile data

Substantiating the claims made in a case study — either by the marketing team or customers themselves — adds validity to the story. To do this, include data and feedback from the client that defines what success looks like. This can be anything from demonstrating return on investment (ROI) to a specific metric the customer was striving to improve. Case studies should prove how an outcome was achieved and show tangible results that indicate to the customer that your solution is the right one.

This step could also include customer interviews. Make sure that the people being interviewed are key stakeholders in the purchase decision or deployment and use of the product or service that is being highlighted. Content writers should work off a set list of questions prepared in advance. It can be helpful to share these with the interviewees beforehand so they have time to consider and craft their responses. One of the best interview tactics to keep in mind is to ask questions where yes and no are not natural answers. This way, your subject will provide more open-ended responses that produce more meaningful content.

4. Choose the right format

There are a number of different ways to format a case study. Depending on what you hope to achieve, one style will be better than another. However, there are some common elements to include, such as:

• An engaging headline
• A subject and customer introduction
• The unique challenge or challenges the customer faced
• The solution the customer used to solve the problem
• The results achieved
• Data and statistics to back up claims of success
• A strong call to action (CTA) to engage with the vendor

It’s also important to note that while case studies are traditionally written as stories, they don’t have to be in a written format. Some companies choose to get more creative with their case studies and produce multimedia content, depending on their audience and objectives. Case study formats can include traditional print stories, interactive web or social content, data-heavy infographics, professionally shot videos, podcasts, and more.

5. Write your case study

We’ll go into more detail later about how exactly to write a case study, including templates and examples. Generally speaking, though, there are a few things to keep in mind when writing your case study.

• Be clear and concise. Readers want to get to the point of the story quickly and easily, and they’ll be looking to see themselves reflected in the story right from the start.
• Provide a big picture. Always make sure to explain who the client is, their goals, and how they achieved success in a short introduction to engage the reader.
• Construct a clear narrative. Stick to the story from the perspective of the customer and what they needed to solve instead of just listing product features or benefits.
• Leverage graphics. Incorporating infographics, charts, and sidebars can be a more engaging and eye-catching way to share key statistics and data in readable ways.
• Offer the right amount of detail. Most case studies are one or two pages with clear sections that a reader can skim to find the information most important to them.
• Include data to support claims. Show real results — both facts and figures and customer quotes — to demonstrate credibility and prove the solution works.

6. Promote your story

Marketers have a number of options for distribution of a freshly minted case study. Many brands choose to publish case studies on their website and post them on social media. This can help support SEO and organic content strategies while also boosting company credibility and trust as visitors see that other businesses have used the product or service.

Marketers are always looking for quality content they can use for lead generation. Consider offering a case study as gated content behind a form on a landing page or as an offer in an email message. One great way to do this is to summarize the content and tease the full story available for download after the user takes an action.

Sales teams can also leverage case studies, so be sure they are aware that the assets exist once they’re published. Especially when it comes to larger B2B sales, companies often ask for examples of similar customer challenges that have been solved.

Now that you’ve learned a bit about case studies and what they should include, you may be wondering how to start creating great customer story content. Here are a couple of templates you can use to structure your case study.

Template 1 — Challenge-solution-result format

• Start with an engaging title. This should be fewer than 70 characters long for SEO best practices. One of the best ways to approach the title is to include the customer’s name and a hint at the challenge they overcame in the end.
• Create an introduction. Lead with an explanation as to who the customer is, the need they had, and the opportunity they found with a specific product or solution. Writers can also suggest the success the customer experienced with the solution they chose.
• Present the challenge. This should be several paragraphs long and explain the problem the customer faced and the issues they were trying to solve. Details should tie into the company’s products and services naturally. This section needs to be the most relatable to the reader so they can picture themselves in a similar situation.
• Share the solution. Explain which product or service offered was the ideal fit for the customer and why. Feel free to delve into their experience setting up, purchasing, and onboarding the solution.
• Explain the results. Demonstrate the impact of the solution they chose by backing up their positive experience with data. Fill in with customer quotes and tangible, measurable results that show the effect of their choice.
• Ask for action. Include a CTA at the end of the case study that invites readers to reach out for more information, try a demo, or learn more — to nurture them further in the marketing pipeline. What you ask of the reader should tie directly into the goals that were established for the case study in the first place.

Template 2 — Data-driven format

• Start with an engaging title. Be sure to include a statistic or data point in the first 70 characters. Again, it’s best to include the customer’s name as part of the title.
• Create an overview. Share the customer’s background and a short version of the challenge they faced. Present the reason a particular product or service was chosen, and feel free to include quotes from the customer about their selection process.
• Present data point 1. Isolate the first metric that the customer used to define success and explain how the product or solution helped to achieve this goal. Provide data points and quotes to substantiate the claim that success was achieved.
• Present data point 2. Isolate the second metric that the customer used to define success and explain what the product or solution did to achieve this goal. Provide data points and quotes to substantiate the claim that success was achieved.
• Present data point 3. Isolate the final metric that the customer used to define success and explain what the product or solution did to achieve this goal. Provide data points and quotes to substantiate the claim that success was achieved.
• Summarize the results. Reiterate the fact that the customer was able to achieve success thanks to a specific product or service. Include quotes and statements that reflect customer satisfaction and suggest they plan to continue using the solution.
• Ask for action. Include a CTA at the end of the case study that asks readers to reach out for more information, try a demo, or learn more — to further nurture them in the marketing pipeline. Again, remember that this is where marketers can look to convert their content into action with the customer.

While templates are helpful, seeing a case study in action can also be a great way to learn. Here are some examples of how Adobe customers have experienced success.

Juniper Networks

One example is the Adobe and Juniper Networks case study , which puts the reader in the customer’s shoes. The beginning of the story quickly orients the reader so that they know exactly who the article is about and what they were trying to achieve. Solutions are outlined in a way that shows Adobe Experience Manager is the best choice and a natural fit for the customer. Along the way, quotes from the client are incorporated to help add validity to the statements. The results in the case study are conveyed with clear evidence of scale and volume using tangible data.

The story of Lenovo’s journey with Adobe is one that spans years of planning, implementation, and rollout. The Lenovo case study does a great job of consolidating all of this into a relatable journey that other enterprise organizations can see themselves taking, despite the project size. This case study also features descriptive headers and compelling visual elements that engage the reader and strengthen the content.

Tata Consulting

When it comes to using data to show customer results, this case study does an excellent job of conveying details and numbers in an easy-to-digest manner. Bullet points at the start break up the content while also helping the reader understand exactly what the case study will be about. Tata Consulting used Adobe to deliver elevated, engaging content experiences for a large telecommunications client of its own — an objective that’s relatable for a lot of companies.

Case studies are a vital tool for any marketing team as they enable you to demonstrate the value of your company’s products and services to others. They help marketers do their job and add credibility to a brand trying to promote its solutions by using the experiences and stories of real customers.

When you’re ready to get started with a case study:

• Think about a few goals you’d like to accomplish with your content.
• Make a list of successful clients that would be strong candidates for a case study.
• Reach out to the client to get their approval and conduct an interview.
• Gather the data to present an engaging and effective customer story.

Adobe can help

There are several Adobe products that can help you craft compelling case studies. Adobe Experience Platform helps you collect data and deliver great customer experiences across every channel. Once you’ve created your case studies, Experience Platform will help you deliver the right information to the right customer at the right time for maximum impact.

To learn more, watch the Adobe Experience Platform story .

Keep in mind that the best case studies are backed by data. That’s where Adobe Real-Time Customer Data Platform and Adobe Analytics come into play. With Real-Time CDP, you can gather the data you need to build a great case study and target specific customers to deliver the content to the right audience at the perfect moment.

Watch the Real-Time CDP overview video to learn more.

Finally, Adobe Analytics turns real-time data into real-time insights. It helps your business collect and synthesize data from multiple platforms to make more informed decisions and create the best case study possible.

Request a demo to learn more about Adobe Analytics.

https://business.adobe.com/blog/perspectives/b2b-ecommerce-10-case-studies-inspire-you

https://business.adobe.com/blog/basics/business-case

https://business.adobe.com/blog/basics/what-is-real-time-analytics

Using Case Studies to Teach

Why Use Cases?

Many students are more inductive than deductive reasoners, which means that they learn better from examples than from logical development starting with basic principles. The use of case studies can therefore be a very effective classroom technique.

Case studies are have long been used in business schools, law schools, medical schools and the social sciences, but they can be used in any discipline when instructors want students to explore how what they have learned applies to real world situations. Cases come in many formats, from a simple “What would you do in this situation?” question to a detailed description of a situation with accompanying data to analyze. Whether to use a simple scenario-type case or a complex detailed one depends on your course objectives.

Most case assignments require students to answer an open-ended question or develop a solution to an open-ended problem with multiple potential solutions. Requirements can range from a one-paragraph answer to a fully developed group action plan, proposal or decision.

Common Case Elements

Most “full-blown” cases have these common elements:

• A decision-maker who is grappling with some question or problem that needs to be solved.
• A description of the problem’s context (a law, an industry, a family).
• Supporting data, which can range from data tables to links to URLs, quoted statements or testimony, supporting documents, images, video, or audio.

Case assignments can be done individually or in teams so that the students can brainstorm solutions and share the work load.

The following discussion of this topic incorporates material presented by Robb Dixon of the School of Management and Rob Schadt of the School of Public Health at CEIT workshops. Professor Dixon also provided some written comments that the discussion incorporates.

Advantages to the use of case studies in class

A major advantage of teaching with case studies is that the students are actively engaged in figuring out the principles by abstracting from the examples. This develops their skills in:

• Problem solving
• Analytical tools, quantitative and/or qualitative, depending on the case
• Decision making in complex situations
• Coping with ambiguities

Guidelines for using case studies in class

In the most straightforward application, the presentation of the case study establishes a framework for analysis. It is helpful if the statement of the case provides enough information for the students to figure out solutions and then to identify how to apply those solutions in other similar situations. Instructors may choose to use several cases so that students can identify both the similarities and differences among the cases.

Depending on the course objectives, the instructor may encourage students to follow a systematic approach to their analysis.  For example:

• What is the issue?
• What is the goal of the analysis?
• What is the context of the problem?
• What key facts should be considered?
• What alternatives are available to the decision-maker?
• What would you recommend — and why?

An innovative approach to case analysis might be to have students  role-play the part of the people involved in the case. This not only actively engages students, but forces them to really understand the perspectives of the case characters. Videos or even field trips showing the venue in which the case is situated can help students to visualize the situation that they need to analyze.

Accompanying Readings

Case studies can be especially effective if they are paired with a reading assignment that introduces or explains a concept or analytical method that applies to the case. The amount of emphasis placed on the use of the reading during the case discussion depends on the complexity of the concept or method. If it is straightforward, the focus of the discussion can be placed on the use of the analytical results. If the method is more complex, the instructor may need to walk students through its application and the interpretation of the results.

Leading the Case Discussion and Evaluating Performance

Decision cases are more interesting than descriptive ones. In order to start the discussion in class, the instructor can start with an easy, noncontroversial question that all the students should be able to answer readily. However, some of the best case discussions start by forcing the students to take a stand. Some instructors will ask a student to do a formal “open” of the case, outlining his or her entire analysis.  Others may choose to guide discussion with questions that move students from problem identification to solutions.  A skilled instructor steers questions and discussion to keep the class on track and moving at a reasonable pace.

In order to motivate the students to complete the assignment before class as well as to stimulate attentiveness during the class, the instructor should grade the participation—quantity and especially quality—during the discussion of the case. This might be a simple check, check-plus, check-minus or zero. The instructor should involve as many students as possible. In order to engage all the students, the instructor can divide them into groups, give each group several minutes to discuss how to answer a question related to the case, and then ask a randomly selected person in each group to present the group’s answer and reasoning. Random selection can be accomplished through rolling of dice, shuffled index cards, each with one student’s name, a spinning wheel, etc.

Tips on the Penn State U. website: http://tlt.its.psu.edu/suggestions/cases/

If you are interested in using this technique in a science course, there is a good website on use of case studies in the sciences at the University of Buffalo.

Dunne, D. and Brooks, K. (2004) Teaching with Cases (Halifax, NS: Society for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education), ISBN 0-7703-8924-4 (Can be ordered at http://www.bookstore.uwo.ca/ at a cost of $15.00)

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Additional menu

Ideally Content Consulting

The Ultimate Showdown: Use Case vs. Case Study

Just like Marvel and DC superheroes, use cases and case studies both come armed with an impressive set of powers. But as with their comic book equivalents, they each come with different strengths. Sometimes saving the day calls for someone faster than a speeding bullet, other times you need a superhero with spidey-sense. It’s the same with use cases and case studies: different needs call for different approaches. 

A use case vs. case study — how will you know which to use in which situations? Let’s take a deep dive into the distinct powers of use cases and case studies then look at the scenarios that each are best suited to. I’ll share some effective formats to consider for each type of content and offer tips for each.

What’s the Difference Between Use Cases and Case Studies?

Before we dive in, let’s define our terms. A use case is written for a particular type of customer, such as buyer type (technical or strategic, for example) or industry. It describes how a solution solves challenges the buyer faces and helps them reach their goals. It paints the picture with a broad brush, encouraging prospects to envision how your product could meet their specific needs. 

A case study focuses on a single customer’s experience with your product or service. It describes quite specifically the challenges the customer needed to solve, how the customer implemented your solution, and exactly how they benefited as a result. A case study requires finer brushwork. It details how the customer deployed your product to solve a specific problem or set of problems. And it quantifies the results the customer achieved because of it.

Benefits of Use Cases

The power of use cases lies in their flexibility. They allow you to show how a particular type of user will get the most out of your product. Use cases give you the freedom to describe problems solved, benefits, and features for buyer types with different priorities. (For example, business leaders vs. technical users or organizations in different industries.) 

Unlike case studies, use cases don’t constrain you to describing how a specific client chose to use your product. Use cases let prospects fill in the details unique to them. They’re great for demonstrating how processes work, highlighting value for specific industries or roles, and showcasing increased efficiencies. 

Benefits of Case Studies

The case study’s twin powers are social proof and the ability to quantify results. When it comes to making purchase decisions, buyers want to hear the experiences others have had with a product. Case studies tell a unique story of a company’s experience with your product and how their investment turned out. 

Since you’re sharing an actual customer’s experience, the case study format allows you to go into more detail. You can include percent of cost savings or time savings, dollar amounts of new revenue brought in, etc. Being able to see the real-life application of your product and the results a real customer achieved is highly persuasive. 

Ideal Formats for Use Cases

You have many options for what your use case can look like. I’ve seen effective use cases take the form of multi-page documents or a single graphic. You’ll want to first identify what information you want to convey, then choose a format that’s well-suited to your purpose. Here are a few popular formats for use cases.

• White paper — White papers make an ideal medium for longer form use cases. If your intended readers are technical prospects, this format allows you to include lots of detailed information.
• One-pager — Single-page sell sheets are perfect for presenting a narrowly-defined use case. Since they’re so short, you can develop multiple one-pagers to target different product features and individual solutions. 
• Graphic — Many people are visual learners. For very-narrow use cases or high-level overviews, infographics give prospects a visual way to process the information.
• Video — A well-produced video gives you a host of options not easily included in a written format. Video use cases have the advantage of being able to show your solution in action. You can also share a bit about your company’s culture, or introduce key members of the product team to prospects. 

Ideal Formats for Case Studies

The core strength of the case study is its ability to tell an engaging story of how an actual company used your product to solve a problem or experience growth. These formats work particularly well when used to present a case study.

• Feature story — The feature story format makes the case study look like a magazine feature. It allows you to make full use of storytelling to weave a narrative. You’ll also include compelling statistics, direct quotes from the customer, and describe the pain they experienced before using your product.
• Q&A — Customer interviews that are heavily-infused with quotes providing specific details lend a feel of authenticity to a case study. The Q&A format also allows prospects to quickly scan and find the information that’s most compelling to them.
• Video — Video is like a chameleon. It blends in well with just about anything. When using video to present a case study, include an interview with the customer. You may also want to demo the product features that directly contributed to the client’s success. 

How to Write Better Use Cases

While use cases can take a variety of forms, these best practices will help boost their effectiveness.

• Describe the challenges and goals common to this type of buyer — Answer two key questions in your use cases: What kind of challenges are they facing in the day-to-day operations of their business? At the start of each day what goals are most important to them to accomplish?
• Make a direct connection between your product’s unique capabilities and the benefits your buyer will experience — If you’ve done your homework with defining your ICPs, you know what’s most important to your audience. Explicitly make the connection between what your product can accomplish and the benefits that matter most to that buyer type.
• Be a problem solver — Show how your solution solves the challenges common to the type of buyer and allows them to reach their goals. Highlight the impact of the status quo and demonstrate how your product effectively resolves the issues.
• Keep it simple — There’s no replacement for brevity. People are busy, and time is precious. A tightly-written use case is much more likely to be read than one that meanders. 
• Weave in story — Even though the use case doesn’t take a narrative format, weave in storytelling techniques as much as you can. It will make the use case easier for prospects to follow. 

How to Write Better Case Studies

Case studies are more engaging and convincing if you include these elements.  

• Tell a story, with your customer as the hero — Everyone loves a hero, except when it’s someone else. Avoid the urge to make your company the hero when writing case studies. Instead, focus on the client as the hero, emphasizing how they overcame a difficult problem and achieved great things with the aid of your solution. Your client is the hero. Your product is their secret weapon.
• Dig into the pain of the status quo — No one likes to feel pain, and everyone wants to avoid it. Be sure you have a thorough understanding of the pain involved in your customer’s situation prior to your solution. And show all the facets of that pain.
• Tie your product’s specific solutions to the pain points — Define the pain points, and show how your solution resolved them. Clearly connect your product’s capabilities with how the client achieved their goals.
• Quantify the cost of “before” and the value of “after” — Stating hard numbers in a case study makes it more believable. And it also gives prospects ammunition for justifying their choice and getting budget. Include stats like dollar amount or percentage of savings, dollar amount or percentage of new revenue, amount of time saved and what was able to be done with the saved time, and improved employee happiness (leading to improved retention rates and performance).
• Include candid quotes — Quotes add a layer of authenticity to a case study. As you’re interviewing your client for the case study, jot down direct quotes. Look for how they capture the essence of their presenting problem, how your product has improved an aspect of their business, and how easy it was to integrate your solution into their business. 

For more on how to craft a compelling customer story, check out How to Write Customer Stories that Sell .

The use case vs. case study debate.

So which one wins in the use case vs. case study debate? They both do. Use cases and case studies are both powerful tools that can be called upon to demonstrate your product’s distinct benefits to prospects. A well-rounded marketing effort will include both. After all, sometimes saving the day requires the use of a cape and spider silk.

Put your case studies to work! Check out The Ultimate Guide to Using Case Studies in Your Marketing for 12 different ways to expand reach.

Schedule a call  to share what’s holding you back from better marketing content, and

Content Strategy Is Much More Than SEO

posted on FEBRUARY 4, 2022

Somehow, the term “content strategy” has become synonymous with SEO strategy. But SEO is only a tiny part of content strategy. Without getting the rest right, traffic may be plentiful but demo requests will be few (and the requests that do come through probably won’t be from best-fit prospects).

Let’s look at four crucial components of content strategy to see exactly why this distinction matters.

If a company’s content looks and sounds like everything else online, no one is going to sit up and take notice. Sure, prospects might find the answer to a question they were Googling, but they won’t remember the brand associated with the insight, and they won’t be highly motivated to share it. 

To make ideal-fit prospects love your brand, you need standout points of view that are connected with what your prospects care about most. Your POVs could include a contrarian stance on the industry status quo, a commitment to fight against a  shared enemy , or an action-backed position on a social issue. 

If your POVs are truly aligned with your ideal-fit buyers and woven into your content strategically, they will not only differentiate your content from everyone else’s but also spark word-of-mouth. 

Value Prop Alignment

Effective content — even top-of-funnel content — will lead prospects to conclude that your solution is uniquely qualified to meet their needs. The way you structure your content and the points you make can create a clear connection between your value props and your prospects’ pain points and priorities. 

Where your brand POVs engage prospects on an emotional level, your value prop alignment engages prospects’ logical side and helps them to understand the ways your product will make their working lives better. 

Of course, this logical journey should be an enjoyable one for your prospects. There’s no need for content to be dry as you’re leading them down this path of thinking. But prospects must be taken on this thought journey to grasp why they should choose your solution over your competitors’.

Status Quo Risks

It’s easy to overlook the status quo as a killer of deals, but it often is exactly that. Buying a new solution is a risk — we’ve probably all experienced a nightmare rollout of software that was a bad fit. No one wants to be the person who championed that hated software (and worry about the impact to their career as a result!). To overcome this resistance, the risks of the status quo must outweigh the risk of buying a new solution in the minds of your ideal-fit prospects. 

A good content strategy will identify the risks involved in the ICP’s status quo and the specific impacts that it will have if it doesn’t change. Digging into the dangers involved in the status quo (when appropriate) in your content will help motivate prospects to take action.  

Channel Considerations

Finally, we get to channels — SEO, paid search, organic social, paid social, email, etc. Channel strategy includes pinpointing which channels ideal-fit prospects prefer for their work-related activities (i.e. sure, you can capture prospects’ attention when they’re trying to relax and forget about work, but it’s probably counter-productive). It also includes how to best approach each channel for maximum results.   

Content must, of course, get in front of prospects before it can engage them. Channel strategy is vitally important, but it’s not worth much without the prior three components. And SEO is only one channel! 

Take a Holistic View for Effective Content Strategy

Content strategy can’t be siloed from the rest of a marketing strategy — it should be just as driven by ICP research, positioning, brand messaging, and product messaging as everything else. Content can be incredibly powerful if it’s created and distributed with a holistic perspective. You can rank content high in search  and  generate high-quality demo requests at the same time.   

Schedule a call  to share what’s holding you back in your content marketing, and I’ll let you know if I can help and how. If I can’t help, I’ll recommend someone who can.

Human-generated content, empowered by AI.

FREE eBook: Establish Authorship & Build Authority Online

When and How to Use a Case Study for Research

May 17, 2021 (Updated: May 4, 2023)

Quick Navigation

What Is Case Study Research?

Types of case studies, when should you use a case study, case study benefits, case study limitations, how to write a case study.

Imagine your company receives a string of negative reviews online. You notice a few common themes among the complaints, but you still aren’t quite sure what went wrong. Or suppose an old blog post suddenly went viral, and you’d like to know why and how to do it again. In both of these situations, a case study could be the best way to find answers.

A case study is a process whereby researchers examine a specific subject in a thorough, detailed way. The subject of a case study could be an individual, a group, a community, a business, an organization, an event, or a phenomenon. Regardless of the type of subject, case studies are in-depth investigations designed to identify patterns and cause-and-effect relationships. Case studies are often used by researchers in the field of psychology , medicine, business, social work, anthropology, education, or political science.

Because they are singular in their focus and often rely on qualitative data, case studies tend to be highly subjective. The results of a single case study cannot always be generalized and applied to the larger population. However, case studies can be valuable tools for developing a thesis or illustrating a principle. They can help researchers understand, describe, compare, and evaluate different aspects of an issue or question.

Image via Flickr by plings

Case studies can be classified according to their purpose or their subject. For instance, a case study can focus on any of the following:

• A person:  Some case studies focus on one particular person. Often, the subject will be an individual with some rare characteristic or experience.
• A group:  Group case studies could look at a family, a group of coworkers, or a friend group. It could be people thrown together by circumstance or who share some bond or relationship. A group case study could even focus on an entire community of people.
• An organization:  An organizational case study could focus on a business, a nonprofit, an institution, or any other formal entity. The study could look at the people in the organization, the processes they use, or an incident at the organization.
• A location:  An event case study focuses on a specific area. It could be used to study environmental and population changes or to examine how people use the location.
• An event:  Event case studies can be used to cover anything from a natural disaster to a political scandal. Often, these case studies are conducted retrospectively, as an investigation into a past event.

In addition to different types of subjects, case studies often have different designs or purposes. Here are a few of the most common types of case studies:

• Explanatory:  An explanatory case study tries to explain the why or how behind something. This type of case study works well when studying an event or phenomenon, like an airplane crash or unexpected power outage.
• Descriptive:  A descriptive, or illustrative, case study is designed to shed light on an unfamiliar subject. Case studies like this provide in-depth, real-world examples of whatever the researcher wants to help the audience understand. For instance, a descriptive case study could focus on the experience of a mother with postpartum depression or on a young adult who has aged out of the foster care system.
• Exploratory:  An exploratory case study, or pilot case study, often serves as the first step in a larger research project. Researchers may use a case study to help them narrow their focus, draft a specific research question, and guide the parameters of a formal, large-scale study.
• Intrinsic:  An intrinsic case study has no goal beyond a deeper understanding of its subject. In this type of study, researchers are not trying to make generalized conclusions, challenge existing assumptions, or make any compare-and-contrast connections. The most interesting thing about the study is the subject itself.
• Critical Instance:  A critical instance case study is similar to an explanatory or intrinsic study. Like an intrinsic study, it may have no predetermined purpose beyond investigating the subject. Like an explanatory study, it may be used to explain a cause-and-effect relationship. A critical instance case study may also be used to call into question a commonly held assumption or popular theory.
• Instrumental:  An instrumental case study is the opposite of an intrinsic study because it serves a purpose beyond understanding the immediate subject. In this type of study, researchers explore a larger question through an individual case or cases. For instance, researchers could use a handful of case studies to investigate the relationship between social media use and happiness.
• Cumulative:  A cumulative, or collective, case study uses information from several past studies as the basis for a new study. Because it takes into account multiple case studies, a cumulative study allows for greater generalization than a single case study. It can also be a more time- and cost-effective option since it makes use of existing research.

Case studies are often used in the exploratory phase of research to gather qualitative data. They can also be used to create, support, or refute a hypothesis and guide future research. For instance, a marketing professional might conduct a case study to discover why a viral ad campaign was so successful . They can then take any lessons they glean from the case study and apply them to future marketing efforts. A psychologist could use a case study to form a theory about the best way to treat a specific disorder. That theory could then be tested later through a large-scale controlled study.

Case studies are a good way to explore a real-world topic in-depth, illustrate a point, discuss the implications or meaning of an event, or compare the experiences of different individuals. A trainer may use a case study to bring to life what would otherwise be an abstract series of recommended action steps or to spark a conversation about how to respond in a specific scenario. Similarly, professors can use case studies to highlight key concepts from a lecture and pose questions to test students’ understanding of the material.

In some situations, case studies are the only way to compile quantitative data in an ethical manner. For instance, many of the recommendations that doctors make regarding what is or is not safe during pregnancy are based on case studies. It wouldn’t be ethical to conduct a controlled study that exposes pregnant women to potentially harmful substances, so doctors rely on the anecdotal evidence provided by case studies to find correlations and draw their conclusions.

Case studies can also be used to gather data that would be otherwise impossible or impractical to obtain. Students often use case studies for their thesis or dissertation when they lack the time or resources to conduct large-scale research. Zoologists might use existing case studies to determine the success rate of reintroducing rehabilitated animals into the wild. A historian could use case studies to explore the strategies used by dictators to gain and maintain power.

Image via Flickr by calebmmartin

Case studies can be used on their own or as a complement to other research methods, depending on the situation. The examples above are just a few instances where case studies can be useful. Case studies also work well for the following:

Providing Insight Through Qualitative Data

Case studies generally provide more qualitative data as opposed to quantitative data , and that makes them an invaluable tool for gathering insight into complex topics. Psychologists, for instance, use case studies to better understand human behavior. Crafting theories on the motives behind human actions would be difficult with quantitative data alone. The information gleaned through case studies may be subjective, but so is much of what makes us human. As individuals, we each have a unique blend of emotions, attitudes, opinions, motivations, and behaviors. Objective quantitative data is rarely the best way to identify and explain these nuances.

By their very nature, case studies allow more more intensive, in-depth study than other research methods. Rather than aiming for a large sample size, case studies follow a single subject. Often case studies are conducted over a longer period of time, and the narrow focus allows researchers to gather more detail than would be possible in a study of thousands of people. The information gleaned may not be representative of the broader population, but it does provide richer insight into the subject than other research methods.

Identifying Avenues for Future Research

Case studies are often used as the first step in a larger research project. The results of a case study cannot necessarily be generalized, but they can help researchers narrow their focus. For instance, researchers in the medical field might conduct a case study on a patient who survived an injury that typically proves fatal.

Over the course of the study, researchers may identify two or three ways in which this patient’s situation differed from others they have seen. Perhaps they identify something unique in the patient’s DNA or lifestyle choices or in the steps doctors took to treat the injury. Letting that information guide them, researchers could use other methods to deepen their understanding of those factors and perhaps develop new treatments or preventative recommendations.

Case studies can also be used in the fields of social work, politics, and anthropology to draw attention to a widespread problem and spur more research. A detailed narrative about one person’s experience will inspire more compassion than an academic paper filled with quantitative data. Stories often have a greater impact than statistics.

Challenging, Testing, or Developing Theories

Case studies can be particularly useful in the process of forming and testing theories. A case study may lead researchers to form a new theory or call into a question an existing one. They are an invaluable tool for identifying exceptions to a rule or disproving conventional wisdom.

For instance, a medical professional may write a case study about a patient who exhibited atypical symptoms to assert that the list of symptoms for a condition should be expanded. A psychologist could use a case study to determine whether the new treatment they devised for depression is effective, or to demonstrate that existing treatment methods are flawed. As the result of a case study, a marketing professional could suggest that consumers values have changed and that marketing best practices should be updated accordingly.

Enabling the Study of Unique Subjects

Some subjects would be impossible, impractical, or unethical to study through other research methods. This is true in the case of extremely rare phenomenon, many aspects of human behavior, and even some medical conditions.

Suppose a medical professional would like to gather more information about multiple-birth pregnancies with four or more fetuses. More information would be helpful because we have less information about them, but the reason we have less information is because they are so rare. Conducting case studies of a few women who are currently pregnant with multiples or have given birth to multiples in the past may be the only practical way to research them.

Case studies can also be used to gain insight into historical events and natural phenomenon — things we are not able to repeat at will. Case studies have also been used to study subjects such as a feral child , child prodigies, rare psychological conditions, crisis response, and more.

Helping People Better Understand Nuanced Concepts

Educators incorporate case studies into their lectures for a reason. Walking students through a detailed case study can make the abstract seem more real and draw out the nuances of a concept. Case studies can facilitate engaging discussions, spark thoughtful questions, and give students a chance to apply what they have learned to real-world situations.

Outside the classroom, case studies can be used to illustrate complex ideas. For instance, a well-constructed case study can highlight the unintended consequences of a new piece of legislation or demonstrate that depression does not always manifest in an obvious way. Case studies can help readers and listeners understand and care about an issue that does not directly affect them.

Despite their benefits, case studies do come with a few limitations. Compared to other research methods, case studies are often at a disadvantage in terms of the following:

Replicability

In most cases, scientists strive to create experiments that can be repeated by others. That way, other scientists can perform their own research and compare their results to those of the initial study. Assuming these other scientists achieve similar results, the replicability of the experiment lends credibility to the findings and theories of the original researchers.

One limitation of case studies is that they are often difficult, if not impossible, to replicate. Although this fact does not diminish the value of case studies, it does demonstrate that case studies are not a good fit for every research problem — at least, not on their own. Additional research would have to be performed to corroborate the results and prove or disprove any generalized theories generated by a case study.

Generalization

Generalization is another area in which case studies cannot match other research methods. A case study can help us challenge existing theories and form new ones, but its results cannot necessarily be generalized. The data we gather from a case study is only valid for that specific subject, and we cannot assume that our conclusions apply to the broader population.

Researchers or readers can attempt to apply the principles from a particular case to similar situations or incorporate the results into a more comprehensive theory. However, a case study by itself can only prove the existence of certain possibilities and exceptions, not a general rule.

Reliability

The reliability of case studies may be called into question for two reasons. The first objection centers on the fallibility of human memory and the question of whether subjects are being honest. Many case studies rely on subjects to self-report biographical details, their state of mind, their thoughts and feelings, or their behaviors.

The second issue is the Hawthorne effect, which refers to the tendency of individuals to modify their behavior when they know they are being observed. This effect makes it nearly impossible for researchers to ensure that the observations and conclusions of their case study are reliable.

Researcher Bias

Researcher bias is another potential issue with case studies. The results of a case study are by nature subjective and qualitative rather than objective and qualitative, and any findings rely heavily on the observations and narrative provided by the researcher. Even the best researchers are still human, and no matter how hard they try to remain objective, they will not be able to keep their findings completely free of bias.

Researchers may have biases they are not even aware of. A researcher may over-identify with the subject and lose the benefit of a dispassionate outside perspective. If the researcher already has an opinion on the subject, they may subconsciously overlook or discount facts that contradict their pre-existing assumptions. Researcher bias can affect what the researcher observes and records, as well as how they interpret and apply their observations.

Case studies can be time-consuming and expensive to conduct. Crafting a thorough case study can be a lengthy project due to the intensive, detailed nature of this type of research. Plus, once the information has been gathered, it must be interpreted. Between the observation and analysis, a case study could take months or even years to complete. Researchers will need to be heavily involved in every step of the process, putting in a lot of time, energy, focus, and effort to ensure that the case study is as informative as possible.

Now that you understand the benefits, limitations, and types of case studies, you can follow these steps to write your own:

• Determine your objective.  Write out your research problem, question, or goal. If you aren’t sure, ask yourself questions like, “What am I trying to accomplish? What do I need to know? What will success look like?” Be clear and specific. Your answers will help you choose the right type of case study for your needs.
• Review the research.  Before delving into your case study, take some time to review the research that is already available. The information you gather during this preliminary research can help guide your efforts.
• Choose a subject.  Decide what or who the subject of your case study will be. For instance, if you are conducting a case study to find out how businesses have been affected by new CDC guidelines, you will need to choose a specific restaurant or retailer. In some cases, you may need to draft a release form for the subject to sign so that you will be able to publish your study.
• Gather information.  Case studies about a person, organization, or group may rely on questionnaires or interviews to gather information. If you are studying an event, you might use a combination of academic research and witness interviews. In some cases, you will record your own observations as part of the study.
• Write a report.  Most case studies culminate in a written report, similar to a research paper. Most case studies include five sections : an introduction, a literature review, an explanation of your methods, a discussion of your findings and the implications, followed by a conclusion.
• Publish your findings.  Once you’ve written your case study, consider the most engaging way to present your findings. A well-written research article is a good place to start, but going a step further will maximize the impact of your research. For instance, you could design an infographic to highlight key findings or commission an animated video to turn your case study into a visual narrative.

Whether research is your primary occupation or only an incidental part of your job, you can benefit from a solid understanding of what case studies are, how they work, and when to use them. Use the information and steps above to design and write a case study that will provide the answers you’re looking for.

CopyPress writer

More from the author:

Quick Navigation What Does a Content Manager Do? Who Does a Content Manager Report To? Are Content Managers Paid...

In our digital age, it’s important to know the best ways to reach your target audience and boost your...

The best content marketing conferences offer the chance to learn more about the industry and provide networking opportunities with...

RECENT ARTICLES

Read More About Measurement

27 Nov 2023

31 Oct 2023

23 May 2023

Filter by Keywords

Product Management

How to create user-focused use cases for ideal success scenarios [with examples].

Engineering Team

December 30, 2023

Are you steering a project, deciphering intricate business processes, or engineering complex software solutions? If so, you’re well aware that success hinges on clarity and precision. Good news! Use cases may spare you and your clients a great deal of trouble.

Imagine you’re constructing a building. Blueprints guide you, outlining each room’s purpose and layout. This is exactly what a use case is: a blueprint to guide system requirements and resulting project operations. It helps map out processes across user interactions, helping you build a system tailored to user goals and needs. 🏗️

A stitch in time saves nine, and similarly, mastering use cases now can save you countless hours later. In this practical guide, we’ll explain:

• The significance of a use case-driven approach in software development
• Steps to write a use case for multiple scenarios

Benefits of use cases in business processes

Step 1: come up with the title and description, step 2: identify the actors, step 3: identify the actors’ goal, step 4: capture stakeholders and their interests, step 5: specify pre-conditions or assumptions, step 6: outline basic flow, step 7: determine exceptions or error conditions, step 8: include extensions or variations to how the system functions, step 9: consider alternative flows, create and manage your use cases in clickup docs, try writing use cases with ai, use case #1: online shopping wishlist, use case #2: travel itinerary management.

What Is a Use Case, and What Purpose Does It Serve?

Use cases are indispensable for understanding user-specific interactions and narratives (or user stories) to create the intended design for a system.

In technical terms, a use case is a detailed description that outlines how a user will interact with an IT solution to achieve a specific goal. It maps out the steps they take , with a clear beginning, middle, and end.

If you’re new to use cases, you’re probably wondering why you should care about it. The truth is that every software development process carries the burden of user-focused project planning. It’s critical to understand the service or system requirements beforehand so that your end product works perfectly and is profitable.

This is where a use case comes in, helping you visualize user interactions from start to finish and pinpoint any hiccups along the way . Think of it as a walkthrough in a strategic game where every move is crucial. Your input, the system’s response, specific processes, and the final outcome are all explicitly stated, leaving no room for ambiguity in decisions.

The idea here is to help project managers, business analysts, and software developers align themselves on what the end user desires in a software application or a system , taking the guesswork out of the picture. The result? Smarter decisions on:

• Features to prioritize
• Design scope
• Bugs to fix

Tip: Need a quick start? Use the ClickUp User Story Mapping Template to initiate use case mapping right away! Its built-in infinite Whiteboard helps you track and prioritize user stories within minutes.

Use cases offer several benefits in developing and managing software systems and projects . Here are seven key advantages for various business stakeholders:

• Clarity into specific interactions : Use cases provide a clear understanding of how users interact with a system, helping define and document functional requirements
• Focused communication : Use cases serve as a bridge between business stakeholders , aligning developers, designers, project managers, and clients
• Identification of how a system behaves : They help identify and document various ways users interact with the system. This includes both normal and exceptional scenarios, providing a comprehensive view of the system’s expected behavior
• Project planning : Use cases help in planning by breaking down the desired functionalities into manageable units addressing specific system goals
• Flexibility : They provide a flexible framework that can accommodate modifications (alternative flows) or additions without disrupting the overall system flow
• Documentation and training : Use cases serve as valuable workflow documentation for future reference. They provide insights that can be useful for training new development team members
• Risk identification : By exploring various success and failure scenarios, use cases assist in identifying potential risks and challenges early in the development process

What to Include in a Project’s Use Case: With Practical Steps

Use cases can include a number of elements depending on the scale and complexity of the system you’re building. Here are some of the most significant options:

• Title and description
• Actors (users)
• Stakeholders
• Pre-conditions
• Exception to the basic flow
• Variations or what-if scenarios
• Alternative flows

These points can be better explained when we explore the practical side of things. Refer to the sections below to understand how to include these elements and distill complex use case scenarios into actionable steps .

Any use case study must have an engaging title. Keep it concise, specific, and indicative of the use case’s purpose. For instance, the title Optimizing Online Checkout: A Use Case for E-Commerce Conversion Enhancement immediately conveys the focus and scope.

Next, your case description should set the context concisely, pinpointing the use case actor or user, the system in question, and the ultimate goal. Here’s an example: This use case outlines the steps taken by an online shopper to complete a purchase, highlighting the system’s response at each interaction to ensure a smooth transaction and reduce cart abandonment.

Keep your language sharp, directly addressing the innovative outcomes you seek.

These are not Hollywood stars but rather the key entities— individuals, groups, or even other systems —interacting with the system under scrutiny. Identifying these actors is akin to casting characters in a play; each has a role, a purpose, and a set of actions that contribute to the unfolding narrative. 🎭

Actors within a use case diagram can be categorized as either primary or secondary . A primary actor seeks the system’s assistance by themselves to achieve a specific goal. On the other hand, a secondary actor provides a service to the system as a direct result of the primary use case. The system initiates interaction with the secondary actor for information or completion of a goal.

Let’s say a user applies for a loan online, which makes them the primary actor. In response to the loan application, the system triggers another resource to calculate interest rates—that resource is the secondary actor.

If you’re still in the research phase and need help identifying the primary actor, you may want to document your findings through the ClickUp User Research Plan Template . Its built-in features help software and UX teams map out user behavior and resolve problems within apps, websites, or projects in an orderly manner. 

Whether an actor is buying a product, signing up for a newsletter, or using a website, their goal is the driving force behind their interaction with your services . It’s your job to understand these goals so you can design a system that helps them achieve them in the most efficient way possible.

Let’s consider a real-world example: if you’re running a retail website, a customer’s goal might be to purchase a product in minimal steps. This use case would require you to outline the steps customers need to take to complete that purchase, from selecting the item to finalizing the payment.

Use this ClickUp SMART Goal Action Plan Template to list out the goals of all identified actors and monitor how they’re addressed by your team.

It’s super vital to identify all the stakeholders and understand their interests to ensure your use case is effective. A stakeholder could be an end-user, a system administrator, or even external actors or systems interacting with your service. They all have unique needs and expectations. Here’s what you should do:

• List all possible stakeholders involved in the use case
• For each stakeholder, identify their interests or what they aim to gain from the use case. For instance, a potential Interest for an online shopper would be an Intuitive and efficient user experience
• Consider how the use case can be fulfilled without compromising the overall goals
• Regularly revisit this list as your project or product develops , ensuring new needs are accounted for

Stakeholder analysis can be a stressful job, especially when there are multiple use cases to monitor. We recommend using quality stakeholder mapping templates to structure the process. 

Pre-conditions set the stage for action, ensuring that all necessary conditions are in place before the use case is initiated. Think must-haves for your scenario to work—like having an internet connection for an online transaction or a user account for access to a members-only area. Imagine the scenario from the user’s perspective and identify and list these prerequisites clearly.

Here’s an illustration showing how pre-conditions are used to outline use cases and automate the workflow for a banking website:

This is the minimum viable product (MVP) scenario, the one where everything clicks, and your use case unfolds just as envisioned. No errors, no hiccups, just a straightforward path to a happy user.

Imagine a scenario where a customer purchases a book from an online store. The basic flow would be:

• The customer logs in to their account
• They search for a book by title, author, or genre
• The customer reviews the book and adds it to their cart
• They proceed to checkout, confirm shipping details, and select a payment method
• They review the order summary and place the order
• A confirmation email is sent to the customer

Each step here is supposed to be clear and necessary, guiding the user towards a satisfying transaction. Fall back on the ClickUp User Flow Template to design efficient use case pathways and share them with your team.

These exceptions represent scenarios where the standard process flow doesn’t apply. Think about what could go wrong and how your system should respond. You can:

• Consider realistic scenarios : Think about all the ways an operation might deviate or lead to failure scenarios. This could be due to technical issues, user errors, or unexpected circumstances
• Document each exception : Clearly describe each exception, including its cause, effect, and how your system should respond
• Prioritize exceptions : Rank exceptions based on their likelihood and impact on user experience

Think of these as what-if scenarios that keep your processes agile . Say if a customer abandons their shopping cart, what’s the next step? This perhaps calls for creating an extension that activates a follow-up email sequence or a special discount offer to re-engage them.

Use cases should adapt to real-world complexities, offering innovative solutions that maintain user engagement. It’s about anticipating the unexpected and scripting a response that turns challenges into opportunities.

Consider alternative courses if challenges or process deviations occur. Imagine you’re designing a use case for an online shopping cart system.

Main Success Scenario (MSS):

• The user adds items to the cart
• The user proceeds to checkout and confirms payment

What if an item is out of stock?

• The system notifies the user immediately
• The system recommends similar products

What if the payment is declined?

• Prompt the user to try a different payment method
• Offer to save the cart for later completion

What if network issues occur?

• Save the user’s progress automatically
• Inform the user and attempt to reconnect

For each what-if , develop an alternative path that guides your system to a successful outcome. 

How to Write Effective Use Cases with ClickUp

Now that we have a thorough knowledge of the process of developing use cases, let’s explore how to write one professionally with ClickUp . This all-in-one project management tool comes with abundant user documentation and use case writing features. Let’s break down the process to showcase just how effortless it can be.🌹

To kick off your business use case model in ClickUp, head to ClickUp Docs , the platform’s integrated solution for creating and storing all types of documents—from user manuals and test case definitions to technical requirements.

Starting fresh? Great, create a new doc. You can use one of ClickUp’s free flowcharting templates to create use case diagrams or case study templates to document user research. Everything will be accessible from a centralized location, making it easier to keep track of the best possible outcome scenario or develop alternative paths.

Invite members from product and marketing teams to work on your use case document in real time. You may want to create Folders to store multiple use cases for your project. The best part is that you can connect your Docs with other project tasks to ensure a smooth work experience.

Let’s dive into the fun stuff! In the Doc editor, just type /ai. Boom! The ClickUp AI modal appears, ready for action. Click on Write with AI to get the party started. Type in your use case topic and add relevant technical requirements to generate a professional-grade, well-structured use case presentation within seconds.

Even with the AI-generated use cases, you’re in control. You can:

• Insert the content elsewhere : Seamlessly insert the AI-generated content into your Doc. Or, just copy-paste and merge it with manually written use cases
• Edit inputs : If the narrative needs a personal touch, edit your prompt or topic to guide the AI in the direction you want
• Regenerate : Fancy a different twist? Explore varied responses from the AI with the same prompt
• Give AI more direction : Extend the conversation by providing additional prompts or directions and get more contextual responses 🤖

Besides generating text, ClickUp AI can also fix the grammar and tone of your existing documents and even summarize lengthy case studies to save you time.

Examples of Use Cases for Software Development Projects

Let’s dive into some business use case examples to better illustrate what they look like and how they can streamline your projects.

An e-commerce platform aims to introduce a wishlist feature that enhances the online shopping experience for users.

Actors : Online shoppers

Goals : Add items to a wishlist; view wishlist contents

Stakeholders : E-commerce platform, online shoppers, product vendors, marketing team, developers

Pre-conditions : User must be logged in and browsing available products

Basic flow :

• User logs into the e-commerce platform
• User browses available products
• User selects the option to add a product to their wishlist
• System adds the selected product to the user’s wishlist
• User can view and manage their wishlist at any time
• System provides personalized product recommendations based on wishlist items

Extensions/Variations: 

• Implement a notification system to alert users when wishlist items are on sale
• Allow users to share their wishlist with friends or family for gift suggestions

Exceptions/Error conditions:

• If a selected product is no longer available, notify the user and provide alternate courses
• In case of technical issues, ensure users can still browse and add items to their wishlist without disruptions

Alternative flow :

• User selects the option to view their existing wishlist
• System displays a list of items in the user’s wishlist
• User can remove items from the wishlist or proceed to purchase
• System updates the wishlist and provides relevant suggestions for additional items

A travel planning app wants to implement a feature for users to create and manage their travel itineraries.

Actors : Travelers, travel app

Goals : Create and edit travel itineraries; receive recommendations

Stakeholders : Travel app companies, travelers, local businesses, tourism boards, developers

Pre-conditions : User must be logged in and have a trip planned

• User logs in
• User selects the option to create a new travel itinerary
• User inputs trip details, including destinations and dates
• System generates an initial itinerary and suggests local attractions
• User can modify the itinerary and add custom activities
• System provides real-time updates and recommendations based on user preferences

Extensions/Variations :

• Integrate a weather forecast feature for each destination
• Allow users to share their itineraries with fellow travelers.

Exceptions/Error conditions :

• If a selected attraction is closed or unavailable during the planned date, notify the user and suggest alternatives
• In case of a connectivity issue, ensure users can still access and modify their itineraries offline
• User logs into the travel app
• The user chooses an existing route
• System displays the current itinerary, including booked accommodations and activities
• User can modify the itinerary, add new activities, or remove existing ones
• System updates the itinerary and adjusts recommendations accordingly

Closing the Case on Success

Whether you’re looking to fine-tune your business process or enhance customer experience, use case modeling is a great tool for visual problem-solvers. If you need an observable result quickly, rely on the strategic use case development tools within ClickUp to accelerate your project timelines and bring your business objectives to fruition. 🍉

Sign up to explore the free-to-use solution .

Questions? Comments? Visit our Help Center for support.

Receive the latest WriteClick Newsletter updates.

Thanks for subscribing to our blog!

Please enter a valid email

• Free training & 24-hour support
• Serious about security & privacy
• 99.99% uptime the last 12 months

• Open access
• Published: 03 June 2024

The use of evidence to guide decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic: divergent perspectives from a qualitative case study in British Columbia, Canada

• Laura Jane Brubacher   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2806-9539 1 , 2 ,
• Chris Y. Lovato 1 ,
• Veena Sriram 1 , 3 ,
• Michael Cheng 1 &
• Peter Berman 1  

Health Research Policy and Systems volume  22 , Article number:  66 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

34 Accesses

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

The challenges of evidence-informed decision-making in a public health emergency have never been so notable as during the COVID-19 pandemic. Questions about the decision-making process, including what forms of evidence were used, and how evidence informed—or did not inform—policy have been debated.

We examined decision-makers' observations on evidence-use in early COVID-19 policy-making in British Columbia (BC), Canada through a qualitative case study. From July 2021- January 2022, we conducted 18 semi-structured key informant interviews with BC elected officials, provincial and regional-level health officials, and civil society actors involved in the public health response. The questions focused on: (1) the use of evidence in policy-making; (2) the interface between researchers and policy-makers; and (3) key challenges perceived by respondents as barriers to applying evidence to COVID-19 policy decisions. Data were analyzed thematically, using a constant comparative method. Framework analysis was also employed to generate analytic insights across stakeholder perspectives.

Overall, while many actors’ impressions were that BC's early COVID-19 policy response was evidence-informed, an overarching theme was a lack of clarity and uncertainty as to what evidence was used and how it flowed into decision-making processes. Perspectives diverged on the relationship between 'government' and public health expertise, and whether or not public health actors had an independent voice in articulating evidence to inform pandemic governance. Respondents perceived a lack of coordination and continuity across data sources, and a lack of explicit guidelines on evidence-use in the decision-making process, which resulted in a sense of fragmentation. The tension between the processes involved in research and the need for rapid decision-making was perceived as a barrier to using evidence to inform policy.

Conclusions

Areas to be considered in planning for future emergencies include: information flow between policy-makers and researchers, coordination of data collection and use, and transparency as to how decisions are made—all of which reflect a need to improve communication. Based on our findings, clear mechanisms and processes for channeling varied forms of evidence into decision-making need to be identified, and doing so will strengthen preparedness for future public health crises.

Peer Review reports

The challenges of evidence-informed decision-making Footnote 1 in a public health emergency have never been so salient as during the COVID-19 pandemic, given its unprecedented scale, rapidly evolving virology, and multitude of global information systems to gather, synthesize, and disseminate evidence on the SARS-CoV-2 virus and associated public health and social measures [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, rapid decision-making became central for governments globally as they grappled with crucial decisions for which there was limited evidence. Critical questions exist, in looking retrospectively at these decision-making processes and with an eye to strengthening future preparedness: Were decisions informed by 'evidence'? What forms of evidence were used, and how, by decision-makers? [ 4 , 5 , 6 ].

Scientific evidence, including primary research, epidemiologic research, and knowledge synthesis, is one among multiple competing influences that inform decision-making processes in an outbreak such as COVID-19 [ 7 ]. Indeed, the use of multiple forms of evidence has been particularly notable as it applies to COVID-19 policy-making. Emerging research has also documented the important influence of ‘non-scientific’ evidence such as specialized expertise and experience, contextual information, and level of available resources [ 8 , 9 , 10 ]. The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the politics of evidence-use in policy-making [ 11 ]; what evidence is used and how can be unclear, and shaped by political bias [ 4 , 5 ]. Moreover, while many governments have established scientific advisory boards, the perspectives of these advisors were reportedly largely absent from COVID-19 policy processes [ 6 ]. How evidence and public health policy interface—and intersect—is a complex question, particularly in the dynamic context of a public health emergency.

Within Canada, a hallmark of the public health system and endorsed by government is evidence-informed decision-making [ 12 ]. In British Columbia (BC), Canada, during the early phases of COVID-19 (March—June 2020), provincial public health communication focused primarily on voluntary compliance with recommended public health and social measures, and on supporting those most affected by the pandemic. Later, the response shifted from voluntary compliance to mandatory enforceable government orders [ 13 ]. Like many other jurisdictions, the government’s public messaging in BC asserted that the province took an approach to managing the COVID-19 pandemic and developing related policy that was based on scientific evidence, specifically. For example, in March 2021, in announcing changes to vaccination plans, Dr. Bonnie Henry, the Provincial Health Officer, stated, " This is science in action " [ 14 ]. As a public health expert with scientific voice, the Provincial Health Officer has been empowered to speak on behalf of the BC government across the COVID-19 pandemic progression. While this suggests BC is a jurisdiction which has institutionalized scientifically-informed decision-making as a core tenet of effective public health crisis response, it remains unclear as to whether BC’s COVID-19 response could, in fact, be considered evidence-informed—particularly from the perspectives of those involved in pandemic decision-making and action. Moreover, if evidence-informed, what types of evidence were utilized and through what mechanisms, how did this evidence shape decision-making, and what challenges existed in moving evidence to policy and praxis in BC’s COVID-19 response?

The objectives of this study were: (1) to explore and characterize the perspectives of BC actors involved in the COVID-19 response with respect to evidence-use in COVID-19 decision-making; and (2) to identify opportunities for and barriers to evidence-informed decision-making in BC’s COVID-19 response, and more broadly. This inquiry may contribute to identifying opportunities for further strengthening the synthesis and application of evidence (considered broadly) to public health policy and decision-making, particularly in the context of future public health emergencies, both in British Columbia and other jurisdictions.

Study context

This qualitative study was conducted in the province of British Columbia (BC), Canada, a jurisdiction with a population of approximately five million people [ 15 ]. Within BC’s health sector, key actors involved in the policy response to COVID-19 included: elected officials, the BC Government’s Ministry of Health (MOH), the Provincial Health Services Authority (PHSA), Footnote 2 the Office of the Provincial Health Officer (PHO), Footnote 3 the BC Centre for Disease Control (BCCDC), Footnote 4 and Medical Health Officers (MHOs) and Chief MHOs at regional and local levels.

Health research infrastructure within the province includes Michael Smith Health Research BC [ 16 ] and multiple post-secondary research and education institutions (e.g., The University of British Columbia). Unlike other provincial (e.g., Ontario) and international (e.g., UK) jurisdictions, BC did not establish an independent, formal scientific advisory panel or separate organizational structure for public health intelligence in COVID-19. That said, a Strategic Research Advisory Council was established, reporting to the MOH and PHO, to identify COVID-19 research gaps and commission needed research for use within the COVID-19 response [ 17 ].

This research was part of a multidisciplinary UBC case study investigating the upstream determinants of the COVID-19 response in British Columbia, particularly related to institutions, politics, and organizations and how these interfaced with, and affected, pandemic governance [ 18 ]. Ethics approval for this study was provided by the University of British Columbia (UBC)’s Institutional Research Ethics Board (Certificate #: H20-02136).

Data collection

From July 2021 to January 2022, 18 semi-structured key informant interviews were conducted with BC elected officials, provincial and regional-level health officials, and civil society actors (e.g., within non-profit research organizations, unions) (Table 1 ). Initially, respondents were purposively sampled, based on their involvement in the COVID-19 response and their positioning within the health system organizational structure. Snowball sampling was used to identify additional respondents, with the intent of representing a range of organizational roles and actor perspectives. Participants were recruited via email invitation and provided written informed consent to participate.

Interviews were conducted virtually using Zoom® videoconferencing, with the exception of one hybrid in-person/Zoom® interview. Each interview was approximately one hour in duration. One to two research team members led each interview. The full interview protocol focused on actors’ descriptions of decision-making processes across the COVID-19 pandemic progression, from January 2020 to the date of the interviews, and they were asked to identify key decision points (e.g., emergency declaration, business closures) [see Additional File 1 for the full semi-structured interview guide]. For this study, we used a subset of interview questions focused on evidence-use in the decision-making process, and the organizational structures or actors involved, in BC's early COVID-19 pandemic response (March–August 2020). Questions were adapted to be relevant to a respondent’s expertise and particular involvement in the response. ‘Evidence’ was left undefined and considered broadly by the research team (i.e., both ‘scientific’/research-based and ‘non-scientific’ inputs) within interview questions, and therefore at the discretion of the participant as to what inputs they perceived and described as ‘evidence’ that informed or did not inform pandemic decision-making. Interviews were audio-recorded over Zoom® with permission and transcribed using NVivo Release 1.5© software. Each transcript was then manually verified for accuracy by 1–2 members of the research team.

Data analysis

An inductive thematic analysis was conducted, using a constant comparative method, to explore points of divergence and convergence across interviews and stakeholder perspectives [ 19 ]. Transcripts were inductively coded in NVivo Release 1.5© software, which was used to further organize and consolidate codes, generate a parsimonious codebook to fit the data, and retrieve interview excerpts [ 20 ]. Framework analysis was also employed as an additional method for generating analytic insights across stakeholder perspectives and contributed to refining the overall coding [ 21 ]. Triangulation across respondents and analytic methods, as well as team collaboration in reviewing and refining the codebook, contributed to validity of the analysis [ 22 ].

How did evidence inform early COVID-19 policy-making in BC?

Decision-makers described their perceptions on the use of evidence in policy-making; the interface between researchers and policy-makers; and specific barriers to evidence-use in policy-making within BC’s COVID-19 response. In discussing the use of evidence, respondents focused on ‘scientific’ evidence; however, they noted a lack of clarity as to how and what evidence flowed into decision-making. They also acknowledged that ‘scientific’ evidence was one of multiple factors influencing decisions. The themes described below reflect the narrative underlying their perspectives.

Perceptions of evidence-use

Multiple provincial actors generally expressed confidence or had an overall impression that decisions were evidence-based (IDI5,9), stating definitively that, "I don’t think there was a decision we made that wasn’t evidence-informed" (IDI9) and that "the science became a driver of decisions that were made" (IDI5). However, at the regional health authority level, one actor voiced skepticism that policy decisions were consistently informed by scientific evidence specifically, stating, "a lot of decisions [the PHO] made were in contrast to science and then shifted to be by the science" ( IDI6). The evolving nature of the available evidence and scientific understanding of the virus throughout the pandemic was acknowledged. For instance, one actor stated that, "I’ll say the response has been driven by the science; the science has been changing…from what I’ve seen, [it] has been a very science-based response" (IDI3).

Some actors narrowed in on certain policy decisions they believed were or were not evidence-informed. Policy decisions in 2020 that actors believed were directly informed by scientific data included the early decision to restrict informal, household gatherings; to keep schools open for in-person learning; to implement a business safety plan requirement across the province; and to delay the second vaccine dose for maximum efficacy. One provincial public health actor noted that an early 2020 decision made, within local jurisdictions, to close playgrounds was not based on scientific evidence. Further, the decision prompted public health decision-makers to centralize some decision-making to the provincial level, to address decisions being made 'on the ground' that were not based on scientific evidence (IDI16). Similarly, they added that the policy decision to require masking in schools was not based on scientific evidence; rather, "it's policy informed by the noise of your community." As parents and other groups within the community pushed for masking, this was "a policy decision to help schools stay open."

Early in the pandemic response, case data in local jurisdictions were reportedly used for monitoring and planning. These "numerator data" (IDI1), for instance case or hospitalization counts, were identified as being the primary mode of evidence used to inform decisions related to the implementation or easing of public health and social measures. The ability to generate epidemiological count data early in the pandemic due to efficient scaling up of PCR testing for COVID-19 was noted as a key advantage (IDI16). As the pandemic evolved in 2020, however, perspectives diverged in relation to the type of data that decision-makers relied on. For example, it was noted that BCCDC administered an online, voluntary survey to monitor unintended consequences of public health and social measures and inform targeted interventions. Opinions varied on whether this evidence was successfully applied in decision-making. One respondent emphasized this lack of application of evidence and perceived that public health orders were not informed by the level and type of evidence available, beyond case counts: "[In] a communicable disease crisis like a pandemic, the collateral impact slash damage is important and if you're going to be a public health institute, you actually have to bring those to the front, not just count cases" (IDI1).

There also existed some uncertainty and a perceived lack of transparency or clarity as to how or whether data analytic ‘entities’, such as BCCDC or research institutions, fed directly into decision-making. As a research actor shared, "I’m not sure that I know quite what all those channels really look like…I’m sure that there’s a lot of improvement that could be driven in terms of how we bring strong evidence to actual policy and practice" (IDI14). Another actor explicitly named the way information flowed into decision-making in the province as "organic" (IDI7). They also noted the lack of a formal, independent science advisory panel for BC’s COVID-19 response, which existed in other provincial and international jurisdictions. Relatedly, one regional health authority actor perceived that the committee that was convened to advise the province on research, and established for the purpose of applying research to the COVID-19 response, "should have focused more on knowledge translation, but too much time was spent commissioning research and asking what kinds of questions we needed to ask rather than looking at what was happening in other jurisdictions" (IDI6). Overall, multiple actors noted a lack of clarity around application of evidence and who is responsible for ensuring evidence is applied. As a BCCDC actor expressed, in relation to how to prevent transmission of COVID-19:

We probably knew most of the things that we needed to know about May of last year [2020]. So, to me, it’s not even what evidence you need to know about, but who’s responsible for making sure that you actually apply the evidence to the intervention? Because so many of our interventions have been driven by peer pressure and public expectation rather than what we know to be the case [scientifically] (IDI1).

Some described the significance of predictive disease modelling to understand the COVID-19 trajectory and inform decisions, as well as to demonstrate to the public the effectiveness of particular measures, which "help[ed] sustain our response" (IDI2). Others, however, perceived that "mathematical models were vastly overused [and] overvalued in decision-making around this pandemic" (IDI1) and that modellers stepped outside their realm of expertise in providing models and policy recommendations through the public media.

Overall, while many actors’ impressions were that the response was evidence-informed, an overarching theme was a lack of clarity and uncertainty with respect to how evidence actually flowed into decision-making processes, as well as what specific evidence was used and how. Participants noted various mechanisms created or already in place prior to COVID-19 that fed data into, and facilitated, decision-making. There was an acknowledgement that multiple forms of evidence—including scientific data, data on public perceptions, as well as public pressure—appeared to have influenced decision-making.

Interface between researchers and policy-makers

There was a general sense that the Ministry supported the use of scientific and research-based evidence specifically. Some actors identified particular Ministry personnel as being especially amenable to research and focused on data to inform decisions and implementation. More broadly, the government-research interface was characterized by one actor as an amicable one, a "research-friendly government", and that the Ministry of Health (MOH), specifically, has a research strategy whereby, "it’s literally within their bureaucracy to become a more evidence-informed organization" (IDI11). The MOH was noted to have funded a research network intended to channel evidence into health policy and practice, and which reported to the research side of the MOH.

Other actors perceived relatively limited engagement with the broader scientific community. Some perceived an overreliance on 'in-house expertise' or a "we can do that [ourselves] mentality" within government that precluded academic researchers’ involvement, as well as a sense of "not really always wanting to engage with academics to answer policy questions because they don’t necessarily see the value that comes" (IDI14). With respect to the role of research, an actor stated:

There needs to be a provincial dialogue around what evidence is and how it gets situated, because there’s been some tension around evidence being produced and not used or at least not used in the way that researchers think that it should be (IDI11).

Those involved in data analytics within the MOH acknowledged a challenge in making epidemiological data available to academic researchers, because "at the time, you’re just trying to get decisions made" (IDI7). Relatedly, a research actor described the rapid instigation of COVID-19 research and pivoting of academic research programs to respond to the pandemic, but perceived a slow uptake of these research efforts from the MOH and PHSA for decision-making and action. Nevertheless, they too acknowledged the challenge of using research evidence, specifically, in an evolving and dynamic pandemic:

I think we’ve got to be realistic about what research in a pandemic situation can realistically contribute within very short timelines. I mean, some of these decisions have to be made very quickly...they were intuitive decisions, I think some of them, rather than necessarily evidence-based decisions (IDI14).

Relatedly, perspectives diverged on the relationship between 'government' and public health expertise, and whether or not public health actors had an independent voice in articulating evidence to inform governance during the pandemic. Largely from Ministry stakeholders, and those within the PHSA, the impressions were that Ministry actors were relying on public health advice and scientific expertise. As one actor articulated, "[the] government actually respected and acknowledged and supported public health expertise" (IDI9). Others emphasized a "trust of the people who understood the problem" (IDI3)—namely, those within public health—and perceived that public health experts were enabled "to take a lead role in the health system, over politics" (IDI12). This perspective was not as widely held by those in the public health sector, as one public health actor expressed, "politicians and bureaucrats waded into public health practice in a way that I don't think was appropriate" and that, "in the context of a pandemic, it’s actually relatively challenging to bring true expert advice because there’s too many right now. Suddenly, everybody’s a public health expert, but especially bureaucrats and politicians." They went on to share that the independence of public health to speak and act—and for politicians to accept independent public health advice—needs to be protected and institutionalized as "core to good governance" (IDI1). Relatedly, an elected official linked this to the absence of a formal, independent science table to advise government and stated that, "I think we should have one established permanently. I think we need to recognize that politicians aren't always the best at discerning scientific evidence and how that should play into decision-making" (IDI15).

These results highlight the divergent perspectives participants had as to the interface between research and policy-making and a lack of understanding regarding process and roles.

Challenges in applying evidence to policy decisions

Perspectives converged with respect to the existence of numerous challenges with and barriers to applying evidence to health policy and decision-making. These related to the quality and breadth of available data, both in terms of absence and abundance. For instance, as one public health actor noted in relation to health policy-making, "you never have enough information. You always have an information shortage, so you're trying to make the best decisions you can in the absence of usually really clear information" (IDI8). On the other hand, as evidence emerged en masse across jurisdictions in the pandemic, there were challenges with synthesizing evidence in a timely fashion for 'real-time' decision-making. A regional health authority actor highlighted this challenge early in the COVID-19 pandemic and perceived that there was not a provincial group bringing new synthesized information to decision-makers on a daily basis (IDI6). Other challenges related to the complexity of the political-public health interface with respect to data and scientific expertise, which "gets debated and needs to be digested by the political process. And then decisions are made" (IDI5). This actor further expressed that debate among experts needs to be balanced with efficient crisis response, that one has to "cut the debate short. For the sake of expediency, you need to react."

It was observed that, in BC’s COVID-19 response, data was gathered from multiple sources with differing data collection procedures, and sometimes with conflicting results—for instance, 'health system data' analyzed by the PHSA and 'public health data' analyzed by the BCCDC. This was observed to present challenges from a political perspective in discerning "who’s actually getting the 'right' answers" (IDI7). An added layer of complexity was reportedly rooted in how to communicate such evidence to the public and "public trust in the numbers" (IDI7), particularly as public understanding of what evidence is, how it is developed, and why it changes, can influence public perceptions of governance.

Finally, as one actor from within the research sector noted, organizationally and governance-wise, the system was "not very well set up to actually use research evidence…if we need to do better at using evidence in practice, we need to fix some of those things. And we actually know what a lot of those things are." For example , "there’s no science framework for how organizations work within that" and " governments shy away from setting science policy " (IDI11). This challenge was framed as having a macro-level dimension, as higher-level leadership structures were observed to not incentivize the development and effective use of research among constituent organizations, and also micro-level implications. From their perspective, researchers will struggle without such policy frameworks to obtain necessary data-sharing agreements with health authorities, nor will they be able to successfully navigate other barriers to conducting action-oriented research that informs policy and practice.

Similarly, a research actor perceived that the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted pre-existing fragmentation, "a pretty disjointed sort of enterprise" in how research is organized in the province:

I think pandemics need strong leadership and I think pandemic research response needed probably stronger leadership than it had. And I think that’s to do with [how] no one really knew who was in charge because no one really was given the role of being truly in charge of the research response (IDI14).

This individual underscored that, at the time of the interview, there were nearly 600 separate research projects being conducted in BC that focused on COVID-19. From their perspective, this reflected the need for more centralized direction to provide leadership, coordinate research efforts, and catalyze collaborations.

Overall, respondents perceived a lack of coordination and continuity across data sources, and a lack of explicit guidelines on evidence-use in the decision-making process, which resulted in a sense of fragmentation. The tension between the processes involved in research and the need for rapid decision-making was perceived as a barrier to using evidence to inform policy.

This study explored the use of evidence to inform early COVID-19 decision-making within British Columbia, Canada, from the perspectives of decision-makers themselves. Findings underscore the complexity of synthesizing and applying evidence (i.e., ‘scientific’ or research-based evidence most commonly discussed) to support public health policy in 'real-time', particularly in the context of public health crisis response. Despite a substantial and long-established literature on evidence-based clinical decision-making [ 23 , 24 ], understanding is more limited as to how public health crisis decision-making can be evidence-informed or evidence-based. By contributing to a growing global scholarship of retrospective examinations of COVID-19 decision-making processes [ 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 ], our study aimed to broaden this understanding and, thus, support the strengthening of public health emergency preparedness in Canada, and globally.

Specifically, based on our findings on evidence-based public health practice, we found that decision-makers clearly emphasized ‘evidence-based’ or ‘evidence-informed’ as meaning ‘scientific’ evidence. They acknowledged other forms of evidence such as professional expertise and contextual information as influencing factors. We identified four key points related to the process of evidence-use in BC's COVID-19 decision-making, with broader implications as well:

Role Differences: The tensions we observed primarily related to a lack of clarity among the various agencies involved as to their respective roles and responsibilities in a public health emergency, a finding that aligns with research on evidence-use in prior pandemics in Canada [ 29 ]. Relatedly, scientists and policy-makers experienced challenges with communication and information-flow between one another and the public, which may reflect their different values and standards, framing of issues and goals, and language [ 30 ].

Barriers to Evidence-Use: Coordination and consistency in how data are collected across jurisdictions reportedly impeded efficiency and timeliness of decision-making. Lancaster and Rhodes (2020) suggest that evidence itself should be treated as a process, rather than a commodity, in evidence-based practice [ 31 ]. Thus, shifting the dialogue from 'barriers to evidence use' to an approach that fosters dialogue across different forms of evidence and different actors in the process may be beneficial.

Use of Evidence in Public Health versus Medicine: Evidence-based public health can be conflated with the concept of evidence-based medicine, though these are distinct in the type of information that needs to be considered. While ‘research evidence’ was the primary type of evidence used, other important types of evidence informed policy decisions in the COVID-19 public health emergency—for example, previous experience, public values, and preferences. This concurs with Brownson’s (2009) framework of factors driving decision-making in evidence-based public health [ 32 ]. Namely, that a balance between multiple factors, situated in particular environmental and organizational context, shapes decision-making: 1) best available research evidence; 2) clients'/population characteristics, state, needs, values, and preferences; and 3) resources, including a practitioner’s expertise. Thus, any evaluation of evidence-use in public health policy must take into consideration this multiplicity of factors at play, and draw on frameworks specific to public health [ 33 ]. Moreover, public health decision-making requires much more attention to behavioural factors and non-clinical impacts, which is distinct from the largely biology-focused lens of evidence-based medicine.

Transparency: Many participants emphasized a lack of explanation about why certain decisions were made and a lack of understanding about who was involved in decisions and how those decisions were made. This point was confirmed by a recent report on lessons learned in BC during the COVID-19 pandemic in which the authors describe " the desire to know more about the reasons why decisions were taken " as a " recurring theme " (13:66). These findings point to a need for clear and transparent mechanisms for channeling evidence, irrespective of the form used, into public health crisis decision-making.

Our findings also pointed to challenges associated with the infrastructure for utilizing research evidence in BC policy-making, specifically a need for more centralized authority on the research side of the public health emergency response to avoid duplication of efforts and more effectively synthesize findings for efficient use. Yet, as a participant questioned, what is the realistic role of research in a public health crisis response? Generally, most evidence used to inform crisis response measures is local epidemiological data or modelling data [ 7 ]. As corroborated by our findings, challenges exist in coordinating data collection and synthesis of these local data across jurisdictions to inform 'real-time' decision-making, let alone to feed into primary research studies [ 34 ].

On the other hand, as was the case in the COVID-19 pandemic, a 'high noise' research environment soon became another challenge as data became available to researchers. Various mechanisms have been established to try and address these challenges amid the COVID-19 pandemic, both to synthesize scientific evidence globally and to create channels for research evidence to support timely decision-making. For instance: 1) research networks and collaborations are working to coordinate research efforts (e.g., COVID-END network [ 35 ]); 2) independent research panels or committees within jurisdictions provide scientific advice to inform decision-making; and 3) research foundations, funding agencies, and platforms for knowledge mobilization (e.g., academic journals) continue to streamline funding through targeted calls for COVID-19 research grant proposals, or for publication of COVID-19 research articles. While our findings describe the varied forms of evidence used in COVID-19 policy-making—beyond scientific evidence—they also point to the opportunity for further investments in infrastructure that coordinates, streamlines, and strengthens collaborations between health researchers and decision-makers that results in timely uptake of results into policy decisions.

Finally, in considering these findings, it is important to note the study's scope and limitations: We focused on evidence use in a single public health emergency, in a single province. Future research could expand this inquiry to a multi-site analysis of evidence-use in pandemic policy-making, with an eye to synthesizing lessons learned and best practices. Additionally, our sample of participants included only one elected official, so perspectives were limited from this type of role. The majority of participants were health officials who primarily referred to and discussed evidence as ‘scientific’ or research-based evidence. Further work could explore the facilitators and barriers to evidence-use from the perspectives of elected officials and Ministry personnel, particularly with respect to the forms of evidence—considered broadly—and other varied inputs, that shape decision-making in the public sphere. This could include a more in-depth examination of policy implementation and how the potential societal consequences of implementation factor into public health decision-making.

We found that the policy decisions made during the initial stages of the COVID-19 pandemic were perceived by actors in BC's response as informed by—not always based on—scientific evidence, specifically; however, decision-makers also considered other contextual factors and drew on prior pandemic-related experience to inform decision-making, as is common in evidence-based public health practice [ 32 ]. The respondents' experiences point to specific areas that need to be considered in planning for future public health emergencies, including information flow between policy-makers and researchers, coordination in how data are collected, and transparency in how decisions are made—all of which reflect a need to improve communication. Furthermore, shifting the discourse from evidence as a commodity to evidence-use as a process will be helpful in addressing barriers to evidence-use, as well as increasing understanding about the public health decision-making process as distinct from clinical medicine. Finally, there is a critical need for clear mechanisms that channel evidence (whether ‘scientific’, research-based, or otherwise) into health crisis decision-making, including identifying and communicating the decision-making process to those producing and synthesizing evidence. The COVID-19 pandemic experience is an opportunity to reflect on what needs to be done to guild our public health systems for the future [ 36 , 37 ]. Understanding and responding to the complexities of decision-making as we move forward, particularly with respect to the synthesis and use of evidence, can contribute to strengthening preparedness for future public health emergencies.

Availability of data and materials

The data that support the findings of this study are not publicly available to maintain the confidentiality of research participants.

The terms 'evidence-informed' and 'evidence-based' decision-making are used throughout this paper, though are distinct. The term 'evidence-informed' suggests that evidence is used and considered, though not necessarily solely determinative in decision-making [ 38 ].

The Provincial Health Services Authority (PHSA) works with the Ministry of Health (MOH) and regional health authorities to oversee the coordination and delivery of programs.

The Office of the Provincial Health Officer (PHO) has binding legal authority in the case of an emergency, and responsibility to monitor the health of BC’s population and provide independent advice to Ministers and public offices on public health issues.

The British Columbia Centre for Disease Control (BCCDC) is a program of the PHSA and provides provincial and national disease surveillance, detection, treatment, prevention, and consultation.

Abbreviations

British Columbia

British Columbia Centre for Disease Control

Coronavirus Disease 2019

Medical Health Officer

Ministry of Health

Provincial Health Officer

Provincial Health Services Authority

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus—2

University of British Columbia

Rubin O, Errett NA, Upshur R, Baekkeskov E. The challenges facing evidence-based decision making in the initial response to COVID-19. Scand J Public Health. 2021;49(7):790–6.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Williams GA, Ulla Díez SM, Figueras J, Lessof S, Ulla SM. Translating evidence into policy during the COVID-19 pandemic: bridging science and policy (and politics). Eurohealth (Lond). 2020;26(2):29–48.

Google Scholar  

Vickery J, Atkinson P, Lin L, Rubin O, Upshur R, Yeoh EK, et al. Challenges to evidence-informed decision-making in the context of pandemics: qualitative study of COVID-19 policy advisor perspectives. BMJ Glob Heal. 2022;7(4):1–10.

Piper J, Gomis B, Lee K. “Guided by science and evidence”? The politics of border management in Canada’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Front Polit Sci. 2022;4

Cairney P. The UK government’s COVID-19 policy: what does “Guided by the science” mean in practice? Front Polit Sci. 2021;3(March):1–14.

Colman E, Wanat M, Goossens H, Tonkin-Crine S, Anthierens S. Following the science? Views from scientists on government advisory boards during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study in five European countries. BMJ Glob Heal. 2021;6(9):1–11.

Salajan A, Tsolova S, Ciotti M, Suk JE. To what extent does evidence support decision making during infectious disease outbreaks? A scoping literature review. Evid Policy. 2020;16(3):453–75.

Article   Google Scholar  

Cairney P. The UK government’s COVID-19 policy: assessing evidence-informed policy analysis in real time. Br Polit. 2021;16(1):90–116.

Lancaster K, Rhodes T, Rosengarten M. Making evidence and policy in public health emergencies: lessons from COVID-19 for adaptive evidence-making and intervention. Evid Policy. 2020;16(3):477–90.

Yang K. What can COVID-19 tell us about evidence-based management? Am Rev Public Adm. 2020;50(6–7):706–12.

Parkhurst J. The politics of evidence: from evidence-based policy to the good governance of evidence. Abingdon: Routledge; 2017.

Office of the Prime Minister. Minister of Health Mandate Letter [Internet]. 2021. https://pm.gc.ca/en/mandate-letters/2021/12/16/minister-health-mandate-letter

de Faye B, Perrin D, Trumpy C. COVID-19 lessons learned review: Final report. Victoria, BC; 2022.

First Nations Health Authority. Evolving vaccination plans is science in action: Dr. Bonnie Henry. First Nations Health Authority. 2021.

BC Stats. 2021 Sub-provincial population estimates highlights. Vol. 2021. Victoria, BC; 2022.

Michael Smith Health Research BC [Internet]. 2023. healthresearchbc.ca. Accessed 25 Jan 2023.

Michael Smith Health Research BC. SRAC [Internet]. 2023. https://healthresearchbc.ca/strategic-provincial-advisory-committee-srac/ . Accessed 25 Jan 2023.

Brubacher LJ, Hasan MZ, Sriram V, Keidar S, Wu A, Cheng M, et al. Investigating the influence of institutions, politics, organizations, and governance on the COVID-19 response in British Columbia, Canada: a jurisdictional case study protocol. Heal Res Policy Syst. 2022;20(1):1–10.

Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:77–101.

DeCuir-Gunby JT, Marshall PL, McCulloch AW. Developing and using a codebook for the analysis of interview data: an example from a professional development research project. Field Methods. 2011;23(2):136–55.

Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13(117):1–8.

Creswell JW, Miller DL. Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Pract. 2000;39(3):124–30.

Sackett D. How to read clinical journals: I. Why to read them and how to start reading them critically. Can Med Assoc J. 1981;1245:555–8.

Evidence Based Medicine Working Group. Evidence-based medicine: a new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA Netw. 1992;268(17):2420–5.

Allin S, Fitzpatrick T, Marchildon GP, Quesnel-Vallée A. The federal government and Canada’s COVID-19 responses: from “we’re ready, we’re prepared” to “fires are burning.” Heal Econ Policy Law. 2022;17(1):76–94.

Bollyky TJ, Hulland EN, Barber RM, Collins JK, Kiernan S, Moses M, et al. Pandemic preparedness and COVID-19: an exploratory analysis of infection and fatality rates, and contextual factors associated with preparedness in 177 countries, from Jan 1, 2020, to Sept 30, 2021. Lancet. 2022;6736(22):1–24.

Kuhlmann S, Hellström M, Ramberg U, Reiter R. Tracing divergence in crisis governance: responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in France, Germany and Sweden compared. Int Rev Adm Sci. 2021;87(3):556–75.

Haldane V, De Foo C, Abdalla SM, Jung AS, Tan M, Wu S, et al. Health systems resilience in managing the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons from 28 countries. Nat Med. 2021;27(6):964–80.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Rosella LC, Wilson K, Crowcroft NS, Chu A, Upshur R, Willison D, et al. Pandemic H1N1 in Canada and the use of evidence in developing public health policies—a policy analysis. Soc Sci Med. 2013;83:1–9.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Saner M. A map of the interface between science & policy. Ottawa, Ontario; 2007. Report No.: January 1.

Lancaster K, Rhodes T. What prevents health policy being “evidence-based”? New ways to think about evidence, policy and interventions in health. Br Med Bull. 2020;135(1):38–49.

Brownson RC, Fielding JE, Maylahn CM. Evidence-based public health: a fundamental concept for public health practice. Annu Rev Public Health. 2009;30:175–201.

Rychetnik L, Frommer M, Hawe P, Shiell A. Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002;56:119–27.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Khan Y, Brown A, Shannon T, Gibson J, Généreux M, Henry B, et al. Public health emergency preparedness: a framework to promote resilience. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):1–16.

COVID-19 Evidence Network to Support Decision-Making. COVID-END [Internet]. 2023. https://www.mcmasterforum.org/networks/covid-end . Accessed 25 Jan 2023.

Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Moving forward from the COVID-19 pandemic: 10 opportunities for strengthening Canada’s public health systems. 2022.

Di Ruggiero E, Bhatia D, Umar I, Arpin E, Champagne C, Clavier C, et al. Governing for the public’s health: Governance options for a strengthened and renewed public health system in Canada. 2022.

Adjoa Kumah E, McSherry R, Bettany-Saltikov J, Hamilton S, Hogg J, Whittaker V, et al. Evidence-informed practice versus evidence-based practice educational interventions for improving knowledge, attitudes, understanding, and behavior toward the application of evidence into practice: a comprehensive systematic review of undergraduate studen. Campbell Syst Rev. 2019;15(e1015):1–19.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to extend our gratitude to current and former members of the University of British Columbia Working Group on Health Systems Response to COVID-19 who contributed to various aspects of this study, including Shelly Keidar, Kristina Jenei, Sydney Whiteford, Dr. Md Zabir Hasan, Dr. David M. Patrick, Dr. Maxwell Cameron, Mahrukh Zahid, Dr. Yoel Kornreich, Dr. Tammi Whelan, Austin Wu, Shivangi Khanna, and Candice Ruck.

Financial support for this work was generously provided by the University of British Columbia's Faculty of Medicine (Grant No. GR004683) and Peter Wall Institute for Advanced Studies (Grant No. GR016648), as well as a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Operating Grant (Grant No. GR019157). These funding bodies were not involved in the design of the study, the collection, analysis or interpretation of data, or in the writing of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

Laura Jane Brubacher, Chris Y. Lovato, Veena Sriram, Michael Cheng & Peter Berman

School of Public Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada

Laura Jane Brubacher

School of Public Policy and Global Affairs, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

Veena Sriram

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

CYL, PB, and VS obtained funding for and designed the study. LJB, MC, and PB conducted data collection. LJB and VS analyzed the qualitative data. CYL and LJB collaboratively wrote the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laura Jane Brubacher .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This case study received the approval of the UBC Behavioural Research Ethics Board (Certificate # H20-02136). Participants provided written informed consent.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1..

Semi-structured interview guide [* = questions used for this specific study]

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Brubacher, L.J., Lovato, C.Y., Sriram, V. et al. The use of evidence to guide decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic: divergent perspectives from a qualitative case study in British Columbia, Canada. Health Res Policy Sys 22 , 66 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01146-2

Download citation

Received : 08 February 2023

Accepted : 29 April 2024

Published : 03 June 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01146-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Decision-making
• Public health
• Policy-making
• Qualitative

Health Research Policy and Systems

ISSN: 1478-4505

• Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
• General enquiries: [email protected]

• Open access
• Published: 05 June 2024

Experiences of medical students and faculty regarding the use of long case as a formative assessment method at a tertiary care teaching hospital in a low resource setting: a qualitative study

• Jacob Kumakech 1 ,
• Ian Guyton Munabi 2 ,
• Aloysius Gonzaga Mubuuke 3 &
• Sarah Kiguli 4  

BMC Medical Education volume  24 , Article number:  621 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Introduction

The long case is used to assess medical students’ proficiency in performing clinical tasks. As a formative assessment, the purpose is to offer feedback on performance, aiming to enhance and expedite clinical learning. The long case stands out as one of the primary formative assessment methods for clinical clerkship in low-resource settings but has received little attention in the literature.

To explore the experiences of medical students and faculty regarding the use of the Long Case Study as a formative assessment method at a tertiary care teaching hospital in a low-resource setting.

Methodology

A qualitative study design was used. The study was conducted at Makerere University, a low-resource setting. The study participants were third- and fifth-year medical students as well as lecturers. Purposive sampling was utilized to recruit participants. Data collection comprised six Focus Group Discussions with students and five Key Informant Interviews with lecturers. The qualitative data were analyzed by inductive thematic analysis.

Three themes emerged from the study: ward placement, case presentation, and case assessment and feedback. The findings revealed that students conduct their long cases at patients’ bedside within specific wards/units assigned for the entire clerkship. Effective supervision, feedback, and marks were highlighted as crucial practices that positively impact the learning process. However, challenges such as insufficient orientation to the long case, the super-specialization of the hospital wards, pressure to hunt for marks, and inadequate feedback practices were identified.

The long case offers students exposure to real patients in a clinical setting. However, in tertiary care teaching hospitals, it’s crucial to ensure proper design and implementation of this practice to enable students’ exposure to a variety of cases. Adequate and effective supervision and feedback create valuable opportunities for each learner to present cases and receive corrections.

Peer Review reports

The long case serves as an authentic assessment method for evaluating medical students’ competence in clinical tasks [ 1 ]. This form of assessment requires students to independently spend time with patients taking their medical history, conducting physical examinations, and formulating diagnosis and management plans. Subsequently, students present their findings to senior clinicians for discussion and questioning [ 2 , 3 ]. While developed countries increasingly adopt simulation-based assessments for formative evaluation, logistical challenges hinder the widespread use of such methods in developing countries [ 4 ]. Consequently, the low-resource countries heavily rely on real patient encounters for formative assessment. The long case is one such method predominantly used as a primary formative assessment method during clinical clerkship and offers a great opportunity for feedback [ 5 ]. The assessment grounds students’ learning into practice by providing them with rich opportunities to interact with patients and have the feel of medical practice. The long case thus bridges the gap between theory and practice, immersing students in the real tasks of a physician [ 1 ]. The complexity of clinical scenarios and the anxiety associated with patient encounters may not be well replicated in simulation-based assessments because diseases often have atypical presentations not found in textbooks. Assessment methods should thus utilize authentic learning experiences to provide learners with applications of learning that they would expect to encounter in real life [ 6 ]. This requires medical education and the curriculum to focus attention on assessment because it plays a significant role in driving learning [ 7 ]. The long case thus remains crucial in medical education as one of the best ways of preparing for practice. It exposes the student repeatedly to taking medical history, examining patients, making clinical judgments, deciding treatment plans, and collaborating with senior clinicians.

The long case, however, has faced significant criticism in the medical education literature due to perceived psychometric deficiencies [ 8 , 9 , 10 ]. Consequently, many universities have begun to adopt assessment methods that yield more reliable and easily defensible results [ 2 ] due to concerns over the low reliability, generalizability, and validity of the long case, coupled with rising litigations and student appeals [ 11 , 12 ]. Despite these shortcomings, the long case remains an educationally valuable assessment tool that provides diagnostic feedback essential for the learning process during clinical clerkship [ 13 ]. Teachers can utilize long-case results to pinpoint neglected areas or teaching deficiencies and align with course outcomes.

However, there is a paucity of research into the long case as a formative assessment tool. A few studies conducted in developed countries highlighted its role in promoting a holistic approach to patient care, fostering students’ clinical skills, and a driving force for students to spend time with patients [ 2 , 13 ], . There is a notable absence of literature on the use of long case as a formative assessment method in low-resource countries, and no published work is available at Makerere University where it has been used for decades. This underscores the importance of conducting research in this area to provide insight into the effectiveness, challenges, and potentials for improvement. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the experiences of medical students and faculty regarding the utilization of the long case as a formative assessment method within the context of a tertiary care teaching hospital in a low-resource setting.

Study design

This was an exploratory qualitative study.

Study setting

The research was conducted at Makerere University within the Department of Internal Medicine. The Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBChB) degree at Makerere University is a five-year program with the first two years for pre-clinical (biomedical Sciences) course and the last three years dedicated to clinical clerkship. Medical students do Internal Medicine clerkships in third- and fifth-year at the two tertiary teaching hospitals namely; Mulago and Kiruddu National Referral Hospitals. The students are introduced to the long case in third-year as Junior Clerks and later in the fifth-year as Senior Clerks. During clerkship, students are assigned to various medical wards, where they interact with patients, take medical history from them, perform physical examinations, and develop diagnosis and management plans. Subsequently, students present their long cases to lecturers or postgraduate students, often in the presence of their peers, followed by feedback and comprehensive case discussions. Students are afforded ample time to prepare and present their cases during ward rounds, at their discretion. The students are formatively assessed and a mark is awarded on a scale of one to ten in the student’s logbook. Each student is required to make a minimum of ten long cases over the seven weeks of clerkship.

Study participants

The study participants were third- and fifth-year medical students who had completed junior and senior clerkship respectively, as well as lecturers who possessed at least five years of experience with the long case. The participants were selected through purposive sampling. The sample size for the study was determined by data saturation.

Data collection

Data were collected through Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs). A total of 36 medical students participated in FGDs, reflecting on their experiences with the long case. Five faculty members participated in individual KIIs. The students were mobilized by their class representative and a brief recruitment presentation was made at the study site while the lecturers were approached via email and telephone invitation.

Six FGDs were conducted, three for junior clerks and three for senior clerks. Each FGD comprised of 5–7 participants with balanced male and female gender representation. Data saturation was achieved by the fifth FGD, at which point no additional new information emerged. A research assistant proficient in qualitative research methods moderated the FGDs. The discussions lasted between 55 min and 1 h 10 min and were audio recorded. The Principal Investigator attended all the FGDs to document interactions and record his perspectives and non-verbal cues of participants.

Semi-structured KIIs were used to collect data from Internal Medicine faculty. Five KIIs were conducted, and data saturation was achieved by the fourth interview, at which point no new theme emerged. The Principal Investigator conducted the KIIs via Zoom. Each interview lasted between 25 and 50 min and all were audio recorded. A research assistant proficient in qualitative methods attended all the Zoom meetings. The data collected were securely stored on a hard drive and Google Drive with password protection to prevent unauthorized access.

Data analysis

Data analysis was done through inductive thematic analysis method. Following each FGD or KII session, the data collection team listened to the recordings to familiarize themselves with the data and develop general ideas regarding the participants’ perspectives. The data were transcribed verbatim by the researchers to generate text data. Two separate transcripts were generated by the Principal Investigator and a research assistant. The transcripts were then compared and manually reviewed by the research team to compare the accuracy with the audio recordings. After transcript harmonization, data cleaning was done for both FGDs and KIIs transcripts.

The transcribed data from both FGDs and KIIs underwent inductive thematic analysis as aggregated data. This involved initial line-by-line coding, followed by focused coding where the relationships between initial codes were explored and similar codes were grouped. Throughout the analysis, the principle of constant comparison was applied, where emerging codes were compared for similarities and differences.

Study results

Socio-demographics.

A total of 36 medical students participated in the FGDs, comprising 18 junior clerks and 19 senior clerks. The participants were aged between 21 and 25 years except two participants who were aged above 25 (30 and 36 years old). Among the third-year students, there were 10 male and 9 female participants while the fifth-year student comprised of 8 male and 10 female participants.

Five lecturers participated in the Key Informant Interviews, three of whom were females and two male participants. They were aged between 40 and 50 years, and all had over 10 years of experience with the long case. The faculty members included one consultant physician, one associate professor, two senior lecturers, and one lecturer.

Themes that emerged

Three themes emerged from the study: ward placement, case presentations, and case assessment and feedback.

Theme 1: Ward placement

The study findings disclosed that medical students are assigned to specific wards for the duration of their clerkship. The specialization of medical wards was found to significantly restrict students’ exposure to limited disease conditions found only in their allocated ward.

With the super-specialization of the units, there is some bias on what they do learn; if a particular group is rotating on the cardiology unit, they will obviously have a bias to learn the history and physical exam related to cardiovascular disease (KII 1).

The students, particularly junior clerks, expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of proper and standardized orientation to the long case on the wards. This deficiency led to wastage of time and a feeling of being unwelcome in the clerkship.

Some orient you when you reach the ward but others you reach and you are supposed to pick up on your own. I expect orientation, then taking data from us, what they expect us to do, and what we expect from them, taking us through the clerkship sessions (FGD 4 Participant 1).

Students’ exposure to cases in other wards poses significant challenges; the study found that as some lecturers facilitate visits to different wards for scheduled teaching sessions, others don’t, resulting in missed learning opportunities. Additionally, some lecturers leave the burden on students’ personal initiative to explore cases in other wards.

We actually encourage them to go through the different specialties because when you are faced with a patient, you will not have to choose which one to see and not to see (KII 4).

Imagine landing on a stroke patient when you have been in the infectious disease ward or getting a patient with renal condition when you have been in the endocrinology ward can create problems (FGD 6 Participant 3).

Theme 2 Case presentation

Medical students present their long case to lecturers and postgraduate students. However, participants revealed variations among lecturers regarding their preferences on how they want students to present their cases. While some prefer to listen to the entire history and examination, others prefer only a summary, and some prefer starting from the diagnosis.

The practice varies depending on the lecturer, as everyone does it their own way. There are some, who listen to your history, examination, and diagnosis, and then they go into basic discussion of the case; others want only a summary. Some lecturers come and tell you to start straight away from your diagnosis, and then they start treating you backward (FGD 6 Participant 3).

The students reported limited observation of their skills due a little emphasis placed by examiners on physical examination techniques, as well as not providing the students with the opportunity to propose treatment plans.

When we are doing these physical examinations on the ward no one is seeing you. You present your physical examination findings, but no one saw how you did it. You may think you are doing the right thing during the ward rotations, but actually your skills are bad (FGD 4 Participant 6).

They don’t give us time to propose management plans. The only time they ask for how you manage a patient is during the summative long case, yet during the ward rotation, they were not giving us the freedom to give our opinion on how we would manage the patient.(FGD 2Participant 6).

Supervision was reportedly dependent on the ward to which the student was allocated. Additionally, the participants believe that the large student-to-lecturer ratio negatively affects the opportunity to present.

My experience was different in years three and five. In year three, we had a specialist every day on the ward, but in year five, we would have a specialist every other day, sometimes even once a week. When I compare year five with year three, I think I was even a better doctor in year three than right now (FGD 1 Participant 1).

Clinical training is like nurturing somebody to behave or conduct themselves in a certain way. Therefore, if the numbers are large, the impacts per person decrease, and the quality decreases (KII 5).

Theme C: Case assessment and feedback

The study found that a student’s long case is assessed both during the case presentation on the ward and through the case write-up, with marks awarded accordingly.

They present to the supervisor and then also write it up, so at a later time you also mark the sheet where they have written up the cases; so they are assessed at presentation and write up (KII 2).

The mark awarded was reportedly a significant motivator for students to visit wards and clerk patients, but students also believe that the pressure to hunt for marks tends to override the goal of the formative assessment.

Your goal there is to learn, but most of us go with the goal of getting signatures; signature-based learning. The learning, you realize probably comes on later if you have the individual morale to go and learn (FGD 1 participant 1).

Feedback is an integral part of any formative assessment. While students receive feedback from lecturers, the participants were concerned about the absence of a formal channel for soliciting feedback from students.

Of course, teachers provide feedback to students because it is a normal part of teaching. However, it is not a common routine to solicit feedback about how teaching has gone. So maybe that is something that needs to be improved so that we know if we have been effective teachers (KII 3).

Whereas the feedback intrigues students to read more to compensate for their knowledge gap, they decried several encounters with demeaning, intimidating, insulting, demotivating, and embarrassing feedback from assessors.

Since we are given a specific target of case presentation we are supposed to make in my training , if I make the ten, I wouldn’t want to present again. Why would I receive other negative comments for nothing? They truly have a personality effect on the student, and students feel low self-esteem (FGD 1, Participant 4).

This study aimed to investigate the experiences of medical students and faculty regarding the use of the long case as a formative assessment method at a tertiary care teaching hospital in a low-resource setting. This qualitative research provides valuable insights into the current practices surrounding the long case as a formative assessment method in such a setting.

The study highlighted the patient bedside as the primary learning environment for medical students. Bedside teaching plays a crucial role in fostering the development of skills such as history-taking and physical examination, as well as modeling professional behaviors and directly observing learners [ 14 , 15 ]. However, the specialization of wards in tertiary hospitals means that students may not be exposed to certain conditions found in other wards. This lack of exposure can lead to issues of case specificity, which has been reported in various literature as a cause of low reliability and generalizability of the long case [ 16 , 17 ]. Participants in the study expressed feeling like pseudo-specialists based on their ward allocations. This is partly attributed to missing scheduled teachings and poor management of opportunities to clerk and present patients on other wards. Addressing these challenges is essential for enhancing the effectiveness of the long case as a formative assessment method in medical education.

Proper orientation at the beginning of a clerkship is crucial for clarifying the structure and organization, defining students’ roles, and providing insights into clinical supervisors’ perspectives [ 18 ]. However, the study revealed that orientation into the long case was unsatisfactory, resulting in time wastage and potentially hindering learning. Effective orientation requires dedicated time and should involve defining expectations and goals, as well as guiding students through the steps of history-taking and physical examination during the initial weeks of the rotation. Contrary to this ideal approach, the medical students reported being taken through systemic examinations when the clerkship was nearing its end, highlighting a significant gap in the orientation process. Proper orientation is very important since previous studies have also documented the positive impact of orientation on student performance [ 19 ]. Therefore, addressing the shortcomings in orientation practices identified in this study is essential for optimizing learning outcomes and ensuring that students are adequately prepared to engage in the long case.

There was reportedly a significant variation in the way students present their long cases, with some lecturers preferring only a case summary, while others expect a complete presentation or begin with a diagnosis. While this diversity in learning styles may expose students to both familiar and unfamiliar approaches, providing a balance of comfort and tension [ 20 ], it’s essential for students to first be exposed to familiar methods before transitioning to less familiar ones to expand their ability to use diverse learning styles. The variation observed in this context may be attributed to time constraints, as lecturers may aim to accommodate the large number of students within the available time. Additionally, a lack of standardized practices could also contribute to this variation. Therefore, there is a pressing need for standardized long-case practices to ensure a consistent experience for students and to meet the desired goals of the assessment. Standardizing the long case practice would not only provide a uniform experience for students but also enhance the reliability, validity, and perception of fairness of the assessment [ 9 , 21 ]. It would ensure that all students are evaluated using the same criteria, reducing potential biases and disparities in grading. Additionally, standardized practices facilitate better alignment with learning objectives and promote more effective feedback mechanisms [ 22 ].

Related to the above, students reported limited observation of skills and little emphasis placed on them to learn physical examination techniques. This finding resonates with the research conducted by Abdalla and Shorbagi in 2018, where many students reported a lack of observation during history-taking and physical examination [ 23 ]. The importance of observation is underscored by the fact that students often avoid conducting physical examinations, as highlighted in Pavlakis & Laurent’s study among postgraduate trainees in 2001 [ 24 ]. This study sheds more light on the critical role of observation in forcing medical students to master clinical assessment and practical skills. The study also uncovered that students are rarely given the opportunity to propose management plans during case presentations, which hampers their confidence and learning of clinical decision-making. These findings likely stem from the large student-to-lecturer ratio and little attention given to these aspects of the long case during the planning of the assessment method. The result is students not receiving the necessary guidance and support to develop their clinical and decision-making skills. Therefore, addressing these issues by putting more emphasis on observation of student-patient interaction, management plan, and having a smaller student group is vital to ensure that medical students receive comprehensive training and are adequately prepared for their future roles as physicians.

The study found that the marks awarded for the long case serve as the primary motivator for students. This finding aligns with previous research indicating that the knowledge that each long case is part of assessment drives students to perform their duties diligently [ 2 , 25 ]. It underscores the crucial role that assessment plays in driving learning processes. However, the pressures to obtain marks and signatures reportedly hinder students’ engagement in learning. This could be attributed to instances where some lecturers relax on supervision or are absent, leaving students to struggle to find someone to assess them. Inadequate supervision by attending physicians has been identified in prior studies as one of the causes of insufficient clinical experience [ 26 ], something that need to be dealt with diligently. While the marks awarded are a motivating factor, it is essential to understand other underlying motivations of medical students to engage in the long case and their impact on the learning process.

Feedback is crucial for the long case to fulfill its role as an assessment for learning. The study participants reported that feedback is provided promptly as students present their cases. This immediate feedback is essential for identifying errors and learning appropriate skills to enhance subsequent performance. However, the feedback process appears to be unilateral, with students receiving feedback from lecturers but lacking a structured mechanism for providing feedback themselves. One reason for the lack of student feedback may be a perceived intimidating approach from lecturers which discourages students from offering their input. It is thus important to establish a conducive environment where students feel comfortable providing feedback without fear of negative repercussions. The study underscores the significance of feedback from students in improving the learning process. This aligns with the findings of Hattie and Timperley (2007), who emphasized that feedback received from learners contributes significantly to improvements in student learning [ 27 ]. Therefore, it is essential to implement strategies to encourage and facilitate bidirectional feedback between students and lecturers in the context of the long case assessment. This could involve creating formal channels for students to provide feedback anonymously or in a structured format, fostering open communication, and addressing any perceived barriers to feedback exchange [ 28 ]. By promoting a culture of feedback reciprocity, educators can enhance the effectiveness of the long case as an assessment tool.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the long case remains a cornerstone of formative assessment during clerkship in many medical schools, particularly in low-resource countries. However, its effectiveness is challenged by limitations such as case specificity in tertiary care hospitals, which can affect the assessment’s reliability and generalizability. The practice of awarding marks in formative assessment serves as a strong motivator for students but also creates tension, especially when there is inadequate contact with lecturers. This can lead to a focus on hunting for marks at the expense of genuine learning. Thus adequate supervision and feedback practices are vital for ensuring the success of the long case as an assessment for learning.

Furthermore, there is a need to foster standardized long case practice to ensure that scheduled learning activities are completed and that all students clerk and present patients with different conditions from various wards. This will promote accountability among both lecturers and students and ensure a consistent and uniform experience with the long case as an assessment for learning, regardless of the ward a student is assigned.

Data availability

The data supporting the study results of this article can be accessed from the Makerere University repository, titled “Perceptions of Medical Students and Lecturers of the Long Case Practices as Formative Assessment in Internal Medicine Clerkship at Makerere University,” available on DSpace. The identifier is http://hdl.handle.net/10570/13032 . Additionally, the raw data are securely stored with the researchers in Google Drive.

Dare AJ, Cardinal A, Kolbe J, Bagg W. What can the history tell us? An argument for observed history-taking in the trainee intern long case assessment. N Z Med J. 2008;121 1282:51–7.

Google Scholar  

Tey C, Chiavaroli N, Ryan A. Perceived educational impact of the medical student long case: a qualitative study. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20(1):1–9.

Article   Google Scholar  

Jayasinghe R. Mastering the Medical Long Case. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2009.

Martinerie L, Rasoaherinomenjanahary F, Ronot M, Fournier P, Dousset B, Tesnière A, Mariette C, Gaujoux S, Gronnier C. Health care simulation in developing countries and low-resource situations. J Continuing Educ Health Professions. 2018;38(3):205–12.

van der Vleuten C. Making the best of the long case. Lancet (London England). 1996;347(9003):704–5.

Reeves TC, Okey JR. Alternative assessment for constructivist learning environments. Constructivist Learn Environments: Case Stud Instructional Des. 1996;191:202.

Biggs J. What the student does: teaching for enhanced learning. High Educ Res Dev. 1999;18(1):141.

Michael A, Rao R, Goel V. The long case: a case for revival? Psychiatrist. 2013;37(12):377–81.

Benning T, Broadhurst M. The long case is dead–long live the long case: loss of the MRCPsych long case and holism in psychiatry. Psychiatr Bull. 2007;31(12):441–2.

Burn W, Brittlebank A. The long case: the case against its revival: Commentary on… the long case. Psychiatrist. 2013;37(12):382–3.

Norcini JJ. The death of the long case? Bmj 2002;324(7334):408–9.

Pell G, Roberts T. Setting standards for student assessment. Int J Res Method Educ. 2006;29(1):91–103.

Masih CS, Benson C. The long case as a formative Assessment Tool–views of medical students. Ulster Med J. 2019;88(2):124.

Peters M, Ten Cate O. Bedside teaching in medical education: a literature review. Perspect Med Educ. 2014;3(2):76–88.

Wölfel T, Beltermann E, Lottspeich C, Vietz E, Fischer MR, Schmidmaier R. Medical ward round competence in internal medicine–an interview study towards an interprofessional development of an Entrustable Professional Activity (EPA). BMC Med Educ. 2016;16(1):1–10.

Wilkinson TJ, Campbell PJ, Judd SJ. Reliability of the long case. Med Educ. 2008;42(9):887–93.

Sood R. Long case examination-can it be improved. J Indian Acad Clin Med. 2001;2(4):252–5.

Atherley AE, Hambleton IR, Unwin N, George C, Lashley PM, Taylor CG. Exploring the transition of undergraduate medical students into a clinical clerkship using organizational socialization theory. Perspect Med Educ. 2016;5:78–87.

Owusu GA, Tawiah MA, Sena-Kpeglo C, Onyame JT. Orientation impact on performance of undergraduate students in University of Cape Coast (Ghana). Int J Educational Adm Policy Stud. 2014;6(7):131–40.

Vaughn L, Baker R. Teaching in the medical setting: balancing teaching styles, learning styles and teaching methods. Med Teach. 2001;23(6):610–2.

Olson CJ, Rolfe I, Hensley. The effect of a structured question grid on the validity and perceived fairness of a medical long case assessment. Med Educ. 2000;34(1):46–52.

Jensen-Doss A, Hawley KM. Understanding barriers to evidence-based assessment: clinician attitudes toward standardized assessment tools. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2010;39(6):885–96.

Abdalla ME, Shorbagi S. Challenges faced by medical students during their first clerkship training: a cross-sectional study from a medical school in the Middle East. J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2018;13(4):390–4.

Pavlakis N, Laurent R. Role of the observed long case in postgraduate medical training. Intern Med J. 2001;31(9):523–8.

Teoh NC, Bowden FJ. The case for resurrecting the long case. BMJ. 2008;336(7655):1250–1250.

Mulindwa F, Andia I, McLaughlin K, Kabata P, Baluku J, Kalyesubula R, Kagimu M, Ocama P. A quality improvement project assessing a new mode of lecture delivery to improve postgraduate clinical exposure time in the Department of Internal Medicine, Makerere University, Uganda. BMJ Open Qual. 2022;11(2):e001101.

Hattie J, Timperley H. The power of feedback. Rev Educ Res. 2007;77(1):81–112.

Weallans J, Roberts C, Hamilton S, Parker S. Guidance for providing effective feedback in clinical supervision in postgraduate medical education: a systematic review. Postgrad Med J. 2022;98(1156):138–49.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

This research was supported by the Fogarty International Centre of the National Institute of Health under award number 1R25TW011213. The content is solely the responsibility of the author and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute of Health.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Medicine, Department of Paediatrics & Child Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

Jacob Kumakech

School of Biomedical Sciences, Department of Anatomy, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

Ian Guyton Munabi

School of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

Aloysius Gonzaga Mubuuke

School of Medicine, Department of Pediatrics & Child Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

Sarah Kiguli

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

JK contributed to the conception and design of the study, as well as the acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of the data. He also drafted the initial version of the work and approved the submitted version. He agrees to be personally accountable for his contribution and to ensure that any questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even those in which he was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated and resolved, with the resolution documented in the literature.IMG contributed to the analysis and interpretation of the data. He also made major corrections to the first draft of the manuscript and approved the submitted version. He agrees to be personally accountable for his contribution and to ensure that any questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even those in which he was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated and resolved, with the resolution documented in the literature.MA contributed to the analysis and interpretation of the data. He made major corrections to the first draft of the manuscript and approved the submitted version. He agrees to be personally accountable for his contribution and to ensure that any questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even those in which he was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated and resolved, with the resolution documented in the literature.SK made major corrections to the first draft and the final corrections for the submitted version of the work. She agrees to be personally accountable for her contribution and to ensure that any questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even those in which she was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated and resolved, with the resolution documented in the literature.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jacob Kumakech .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval.

Ethical approval to conduct the study was obtained from the Makerere University School of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee, with ethics ID Mak-SOMREC-2022-524. Informed consent was obtained from all participants using the Mak-SOMREC informed consent form.

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Kumakech, J., Munabi, I.G., Mubuuke, A.G. et al. Experiences of medical students and faculty regarding the use of long case as a formative assessment method at a tertiary care teaching hospital in a low resource setting: a qualitative study. BMC Med Educ 24 , 621 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05589-7

Download citation

Received : 04 April 2024

Accepted : 22 May 2024

Published : 05 June 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05589-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Formative assessment
• Medical education
• Low-resource setting

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

The state of AI in early 2024: Gen AI adoption spikes and starts to generate value

If 2023 was the year the world discovered generative AI (gen AI) , 2024 is the year organizations truly began using—and deriving business value from—this new technology. In the latest McKinsey Global Survey  on AI, 65 percent of respondents report that their organizations are regularly using gen AI, nearly double the percentage from our previous survey just ten months ago. Respondents’ expectations for gen AI’s impact remain as high as they were last year , with three-quarters predicting that gen AI will lead to significant or disruptive change in their industries in the years ahead.

About the authors

This article is a collaborative effort by Alex Singla , Alexander Sukharevsky , Lareina Yee , and Michael Chui , with Bryce Hall , representing views from QuantumBlack, AI by McKinsey, and McKinsey Digital.

Organizations are already seeing material benefits from gen AI use, reporting both cost decreases and revenue jumps in the business units deploying the technology. The survey also provides insights into the kinds of risks presented by gen AI—most notably, inaccuracy—as well as the emerging practices of top performers to mitigate those challenges and capture value.

AI adoption surges

Interest in generative AI has also brightened the spotlight on a broader set of AI capabilities. For the past six years, AI adoption by respondents’ organizations has hovered at about 50 percent. This year, the survey finds that adoption has jumped to 72 percent (Exhibit 1). And the interest is truly global in scope. Our 2023 survey found that AI adoption did not reach 66 percent in any region; however, this year more than two-thirds of respondents in nearly every region say their organizations are using AI. 1 Organizations based in Central and South America are the exception, with 58 percent of respondents working for organizations based in Central and South America reporting AI adoption. Looking by industry, the biggest increase in adoption can be found in professional services. 2 Includes respondents working for organizations focused on human resources, legal services, management consulting, market research, R&D, tax preparation, and training.

Also, responses suggest that companies are now using AI in more parts of the business. Half of respondents say their organizations have adopted AI in two or more business functions, up from less than a third of respondents in 2023 (Exhibit 2).

Gen AI adoption is most common in the functions where it can create the most value

Most respondents now report that their organizations—and they as individuals—are using gen AI. Sixty-five percent of respondents say their organizations are regularly using gen AI in at least one business function, up from one-third last year. The average organization using gen AI is doing so in two functions, most often in marketing and sales and in product and service development—two functions in which previous research  determined that gen AI adoption could generate the most value 3 “ The economic potential of generative AI: The next productivity frontier ,” McKinsey, June 14, 2023. —as well as in IT (Exhibit 3). The biggest increase from 2023 is found in marketing and sales, where reported adoption has more than doubled. Yet across functions, only two use cases, both within marketing and sales, are reported by 15 percent or more of respondents.

Gen AI also is weaving its way into respondents’ personal lives. Compared with 2023, respondents are much more likely to be using gen AI at work and even more likely to be using gen AI both at work and in their personal lives (Exhibit 4). The survey finds upticks in gen AI use across all regions, with the largest increases in Asia–Pacific and Greater China. Respondents at the highest seniority levels, meanwhile, show larger jumps in the use of gen Al tools for work and outside of work compared with their midlevel-management peers. Looking at specific industries, respondents working in energy and materials and in professional services report the largest increase in gen AI use.

Investments in gen AI and analytical AI are beginning to create value

The latest survey also shows how different industries are budgeting for gen AI. Responses suggest that, in many industries, organizations are about equally as likely to be investing more than 5 percent of their digital budgets in gen AI as they are in nongenerative, analytical-AI solutions (Exhibit 5). Yet in most industries, larger shares of respondents report that their organizations spend more than 20 percent on analytical AI than on gen AI. Looking ahead, most respondents—67 percent—expect their organizations to invest more in AI over the next three years.

Where are those investments paying off? For the first time, our latest survey explored the value created by gen AI use by business function. The function in which the largest share of respondents report seeing cost decreases is human resources. Respondents most commonly report meaningful revenue increases (of more than 5 percent) in supply chain and inventory management (Exhibit 6). For analytical AI, respondents most often report seeing cost benefits in service operations—in line with what we found last year —as well as meaningful revenue increases from AI use in marketing and sales.

Inaccuracy: The most recognized and experienced risk of gen AI use

As businesses begin to see the benefits of gen AI, they’re also recognizing the diverse risks associated with the technology. These can range from data management risks such as data privacy, bias, or intellectual property (IP) infringement to model management risks, which tend to focus on inaccurate output or lack of explainability. A third big risk category is security and incorrect use.

Respondents to the latest survey are more likely than they were last year to say their organizations consider inaccuracy and IP infringement to be relevant to their use of gen AI, and about half continue to view cybersecurity as a risk (Exhibit 7).

Conversely, respondents are less likely than they were last year to say their organizations consider workforce and labor displacement to be relevant risks and are not increasing efforts to mitigate them.

In fact, inaccuracy— which can affect use cases across the gen AI value chain , ranging from customer journeys and summarization to coding and creative content—is the only risk that respondents are significantly more likely than last year to say their organizations are actively working to mitigate.

Some organizations have already experienced negative consequences from the use of gen AI, with 44 percent of respondents saying their organizations have experienced at least one consequence (Exhibit 8). Respondents most often report inaccuracy as a risk that has affected their organizations, followed by cybersecurity and explainability.

Our previous research has found that there are several elements of governance that can help in scaling gen AI use responsibly, yet few respondents report having these risk-related practices in place. 4 “ Implementing generative AI with speed and safety ,” McKinsey Quarterly , March 13, 2024. For example, just 18 percent say their organizations have an enterprise-wide council or board with the authority to make decisions involving responsible AI governance, and only one-third say gen AI risk awareness and risk mitigation controls are required skill sets for technical talent.

Bringing gen AI capabilities to bear

The latest survey also sought to understand how, and how quickly, organizations are deploying these new gen AI tools. We have found three archetypes for implementing gen AI solutions : takers use off-the-shelf, publicly available solutions; shapers customize those tools with proprietary data and systems; and makers develop their own foundation models from scratch. 5 “ Technology’s generational moment with generative AI: A CIO and CTO guide ,” McKinsey, July 11, 2023. Across most industries, the survey results suggest that organizations are finding off-the-shelf offerings applicable to their business needs—though many are pursuing opportunities to customize models or even develop their own (Exhibit 9). About half of reported gen AI uses within respondents’ business functions are utilizing off-the-shelf, publicly available models or tools, with little or no customization. Respondents in energy and materials, technology, and media and telecommunications are more likely to report significant customization or tuning of publicly available models or developing their own proprietary models to address specific business needs.

Respondents most often report that their organizations required one to four months from the start of a project to put gen AI into production, though the time it takes varies by business function (Exhibit 10). It also depends upon the approach for acquiring those capabilities. Not surprisingly, reported uses of highly customized or proprietary models are 1.5 times more likely than off-the-shelf, publicly available models to take five months or more to implement.

Gen AI high performers are excelling despite facing challenges

Gen AI is a new technology, and organizations are still early in the journey of pursuing its opportunities and scaling it across functions. So it’s little surprise that only a small subset of respondents (46 out of 876) report that a meaningful share of their organizations’ EBIT can be attributed to their deployment of gen AI. Still, these gen AI leaders are worth examining closely. These, after all, are the early movers, who already attribute more than 10 percent of their organizations’ EBIT to their use of gen AI. Forty-two percent of these high performers say more than 20 percent of their EBIT is attributable to their use of nongenerative, analytical AI, and they span industries and regions—though most are at organizations with less than $1 billion in annual revenue. The AI-related practices at these organizations can offer guidance to those looking to create value from gen AI adoption at their own organizations.

To start, gen AI high performers are using gen AI in more business functions—an average of three functions, while others average two. They, like other organizations, are most likely to use gen AI in marketing and sales and product or service development, but they’re much more likely than others to use gen AI solutions in risk, legal, and compliance; in strategy and corporate finance; and in supply chain and inventory management. They’re more than three times as likely as others to be using gen AI in activities ranging from processing of accounting documents and risk assessment to R&D testing and pricing and promotions. While, overall, about half of reported gen AI applications within business functions are utilizing publicly available models or tools, gen AI high performers are less likely to use those off-the-shelf options than to either implement significantly customized versions of those tools or to develop their own proprietary foundation models.

What else are these high performers doing differently? For one thing, they are paying more attention to gen-AI-related risks. Perhaps because they are further along on their journeys, they are more likely than others to say their organizations have experienced every negative consequence from gen AI we asked about, from cybersecurity and personal privacy to explainability and IP infringement. Given that, they are more likely than others to report that their organizations consider those risks, as well as regulatory compliance, environmental impacts, and political stability, to be relevant to their gen AI use, and they say they take steps to mitigate more risks than others do.

Gen AI high performers are also much more likely to say their organizations follow a set of risk-related best practices (Exhibit 11). For example, they are nearly twice as likely as others to involve the legal function and embed risk reviews early on in the development of gen AI solutions—that is, to “ shift left .” They’re also much more likely than others to employ a wide range of other best practices, from strategy-related practices to those related to scaling.

In addition to experiencing the risks of gen AI adoption, high performers have encountered other challenges that can serve as warnings to others (Exhibit 12). Seventy percent say they have experienced difficulties with data, including defining processes for data governance, developing the ability to quickly integrate data into AI models, and an insufficient amount of training data, highlighting the essential role that data play in capturing value. High performers are also more likely than others to report experiencing challenges with their operating models, such as implementing agile ways of working and effective sprint performance management.

About the research

The online survey was in the field from February 22 to March 5, 2024, and garnered responses from 1,363 participants representing the full range of regions, industries, company sizes, functional specialties, and tenures. Of those respondents, 981 said their organizations had adopted AI in at least one business function, and 878 said their organizations were regularly using gen AI in at least one function. To adjust for differences in response rates, the data are weighted by the contribution of each respondent’s nation to global GDP.

Alex Singla and Alexander Sukharevsky  are global coleaders of QuantumBlack, AI by McKinsey, and senior partners in McKinsey’s Chicago and London offices, respectively; Lareina Yee  is a senior partner in the Bay Area office, where Michael Chui , a McKinsey Global Institute partner, is a partner; and Bryce Hall  is an associate partner in the Washington, DC, office.

They wish to thank Kaitlin Noe, Larry Kanter, Mallika Jhamb, and Shinjini Srivastava for their contributions to this work.

This article was edited by Heather Hanselman, a senior editor in McKinsey’s Atlanta office.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

Moving past gen AI’s honeymoon phase: Seven hard truths for CIOs to get from pilot to scale

A generative AI reset: Rewiring to turn potential into value in 2024

Implementing generative AI with speed and safety

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Weekend Edition Sunday

• Latest Show

Sunday Puzzle

• Corrections

Listen to the lead story from this episode.

Politics chat: How voters are responding to Trump's felony conviction

by  Ayesha Rascoe ,  Mara Liasson

The Americas

Mexico votes for a new president after a campaigning season plagued by violence.

by  Eyder Peralta ,  Ayesha Rascoe

Middle East

Aid workers in gaza say nowhere is safe after israeli attacks on 'humanitarian zones'.

by  Hadeel Al-Shalchi

Girls in the U.S. are getting their period earlier. Here's what parents should know

by  Ayesha Rascoe ,  Maria Godoy

Bookstores have come under attack in Ukraine. But interest in reading is only growing

by  Joanna Kakissis

25 years ago, Napster changed how we listen to music forever

by  Ayesha Rascoe

What locals think of the proposal to build U.S.'s tallest building in Oklahoma City

by  Graycen Wheeler

Sunday Puzzle NPR hide caption

Sunday Puzzle: Second in Line

by  Will Shortz

Movie Interviews

A new animated film follows a lonely dog and his robot friend in new york city, conservative media sows doubt about the verdict in trump's felony convictions.

by  Ayesha Rascoe ,  David Folkenflik

Supreme Court judge accused of bias towards Trump declines to recuse himself from case

Some states are adopting a new form of reading instruction to combat falling scores.

by  Juma Sei

A new movie tells the story of Kemba Smith Pradia, race and incarceration

Strange news, meet abby lampe, two-time champion of the cheese-wheel-chasing race, meet abby lampe, two-time champion of the chees-wheel-chasing race, 100 years ago, indigenous people were granted u.s. citizenship by law.

by  Sandhya Dirks

The first professional women's hockey league in the U.S. has a winner

Music interviews, jon lampley, a veteran of stephen colbert's talk show, releases his debut album.

by  D. Parvaz ,  Ayesha Rascoe ,  Ryan Benk

Searching for a song you heard between stories? We've retired music buttons on these pages. Learn more here.

Role of Environmental Risk Factors in the Etiology of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Multicenter Study

• Original Article
• Published: 05 June 2024

Cite this article

• Cemile Cansu Alperen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9227-0953 1 ,
• Barıs Soydas 2 ,
• Ender Serin 2 ,
• Mustafa Erbayrak 3 ,
• Nurten Akyurek Savas 4 ,
• Gulhan Kanat Unler 5 ,
• Cenk Emre Meral 6 ,
• Ugur Toprak 7 ,
• Ahmet Sedat Boyacioglu 8 &
• Ulku Dagli 8  

The increasing global incidence and prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) necessitates an investigation into the potential influence of environmental risk factors on its origin.

This multicenter case-control study aimed to investigate potential environmental risk factors contributing to IBD development in Turkey.

The study included 156 Crohn’s disease (CD), 277 ulcerative colitis (UC) patients, and 468 controls (matched for age and gender) from six hospitals’ gastroenterology departments. Data collection relied on the International Organization of IBD’s questionnaire on environmental factors. Each environmental factor was initially analyzed using univariate and subsequently multivariate logistic regression models.

In the multivariate model, regular coffee consumption was associated with decreased odds for both CD (OR 0.28; 95% CI 0.14–0.55) and UC (OR 0.25; 95% CI 0.15–0.42). Stress was associated with UC (OR 3.27; 95% CI 1.76–6.10) and CD (OR 4.40; 95% CI 2.12–9.10) development. A history of childhood infectious diseases (gastroenteritis, upper respiratory tract infections, etc.) raised the odds for both CD (OR 9.45; 95% CI 2.51–35.6) and UC (OR 7.56; 95% CI 1.57–36.4). Conversely, consuming well/spring water (OR 0.22; 95% CI 0.10–0.50) and childhood antibiotic use (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.18–0.93) showed a positive association against UC. Increased consumption of refined sugar and industrial food products emerged as risk factors for IBD. Smoking increased the risk for CD (OR 2.38; 95% CI 1.16–4.91), while ex-smoking increased the risk for UC (OR 3.16; 95% CI 1.19–8.37).

Conclusions

This study represents the first multicenter case–control study in Turkey examining the effects of environmental factors on IBD. It revealed that coffee consumption is positively associated, while stress and childhood infection-related diseases are risk factors. These findings, which are not supported by other studies, provide insight into the relationships between these factors and IBD.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Ponder A, Long MD. A clinical review of recent findings in the epidemiology of inflammatory bowel disease. Clin Epidemiol. 2013;5:237–247. https://doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S33961 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

GBD 2017 Inflammatory Bowel Disease Collaborators. The global, regional, and national burden of inflammatory bowel disease in 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;5:17–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(19)30333-4 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Ng SC, Shi HY, Hamidi N et al. Worldwide incidence and prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease in the 21st century: a systematic review of population-based studies. Lancet. 2017;390:2769–2778. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32448-0 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Ahuja V, Tandon RK. Inflammatory bowel disease in the Asia-Pacific area: a comparison with developed countries and regional differences. J Dig Dis. 2010;11:134–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-2980.2010.00429.x .

Cosnes J, Gower-Rousseau C, Seksik P, Cortot A. Epidemiology and natural history of inflammatory bowel diseases. Gastroenterology. 2011;140:1785–1794. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2011.01.055 .

Molodecky NA, Soon IS, Rabi DM et al. Increasing incidence and prevalence of the inflammatory bowel diseases with time, based on systematic review. Gastroenterology. 2012;142:46-e30. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2011.10.001 .

Dagli U (2008) Epidemiology and genetics of inflammatory bowel disease in Turkey. Proceedings of the falk symposium 159 on IBD 2007 achievements in research and clinical practice; 2007 May 4–5; Istanbul, Turkey. Falk symposium abstracts book of ınvited lectures, pp. 25–26

Du L, Ha C. Epidemiology and pathogenesis of ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2020;49:643–654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gtc.2020.07.005 .

Torres J, Mehandru S, Colombel JF, Peyrin-Biroulet L. Crohn’s disease. Lancet. 2017;389:1741–1755. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31711-1 .

Mahid SS, Minor KS, Soto RE, Hornung CA, Galandiuk S. Smoking and inflammatory bowel disease: a meta-analysis. Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81:1462–1471. https://doi.org/10.4065/81.11.1462 .

Ng SC, Bernstein CN, Vatn MH et al. Geographical variability and environmental risk factors in inflammatory bowel disease. Gut. 2013;62:630–649. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2012-303661 .

Shaw SY, Blanchard JF, Bernstein CN. Association between the use of antibiotics in the first year of life and pediatric inflammatory bowel disease. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010;105:2687–2692. https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2010.398 .

Ungaro R, Bernstein CN, Gearry R et al. Antibiotics associated with increased risk of new-onset Crohn’s disease but not ulcerative colitis: a meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014;109:1728–1738. https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2014.246 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Vedamurthy A, Ananthakrishnan AN. Influence of environmental factors in the development and outcomes of ınflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterol Hepatol (NY). 2019;15:72–82.

Google Scholar  

Ng SC, Tang W, Leong RW et al. Environmental risk factors in inflammatory bowel disease: a population-based case-control study in Asia-Pacific. Gut. 2015;64:1063–1071. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2014-307410 .

Halfvarson J, Jess T, Magnuson A et al. Environmental factors in inflammatory bowel disease: a co-twin control study of a Swedish–Danish twin population. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2006;12:925–933. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mib.0000228998.29466.ac .

Chowdhury MZI, Turin TC. Variable selection strategies and its importance in clinical prediction modelling. Fam Med Community Health. 2020;8:e000262. https://doi.org/10.1136/fmch-2019-000262 .

Axelrad JE, Cadwell KH, Colombel JF, Shah SC. The role of gastrointestinal pathogens in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review. Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2021;14:17562848211004492. https://doi.org/10.1177/17562848211004493 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Singh N, Bernstein CN. Environmental risk factors for inflammatory bowel disease. United Eur Gastroenterol J. 2022;10:1047–1053. https://doi.org/10.1002/ueg2.12319 .

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Faye AS, Allin KH, Iversen AT et al. Antibiotic use as a risk factor for inflammatory bowel disease across the ages: a population-based cohort study. Gut. 2023;72:663–670. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2022-327845 .

Piovani D, Danese S, Peyrin-Biroulet L, Nikolopoulos GK, Lytras T, Bonovas S. Environmental risk factors for inflammatory bowel diseases: an umbrella review of meta-analyses. Gastroenterology. 2019;157:647-659.e4. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2019.04.016 .

Agrawal M, Sabino J, Frias-Gomes C et al. Early life exposures and the risk of inflammatory bowel disease: systematic review and meta-analyses. EClinicalMedicine. 2021;36:100884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.100884 .

Baron S, Turck D, Leplat C et al. Environmental risk factors in paediatric inflammatory bowel diseases: a population based case control study. Gut. 2005;54:357–363. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.2004.054353 .

Lee IA, Low D, Kamba A, Llado V, Mizoguchi E. Oral caffeine administration ameliorates acute colitis by suppressing chitinase 3-like 1 expression in intestinal epithelial cells. J Gastroenterol. 2014;49:1206–1216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00535-013-0865-3 .

Bianchi Porro G, Panza E. Smoking, sugar, and inflammatory bowel disease. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1985;291:971–972. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.291.6500.971-c .

Hansen TS, Jess T, Vind I et al. Environmental factors in inflammatory bowel disease: a case-control study based on a Danish inception cohort. J Crohns Colitis. 2011;5:577–584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crohns.2011.05.010 .

Jakobsen C, Paerregaard A, Munkholm P, Wewer V. Environmental factors and risk of developing paediatric inflammatory bowel disease—a population based study 2007–2009. J Crohns Colitis. 2013;7:79–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crohns.2012.05.024 .

Russel MG, Engels LG, Muris JW et al. Modern life’ in the epidemiology of inflammatory bowel disease: a case-control study with special emphasis on nutritional factors. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1998;10:243–249. https://doi.org/10.1097/00042737-199803000-00010 .

Khalili H, Chan SSM, Lochhead P, Ananthakrishnan AN, Hart AR, Chan AT. The role of diet in the aetiopathogenesis of inflammatory bowel disease. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;15:525–535. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41575-018-0022-9 .

Altajar S, Moss A. Inflammatory bowel disease environmental risk factors: diet and gut microbiota. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2020;22:57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-020-00794-y .

Bisgaard TH, Allin KH, Keefer L, Ananthakrishnan AN, Jess T. Depression and anxiety in inflammatory bowel disease: epidemiology, mechanisms and treatment. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022;19:717–726. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41575-022-00634-6 .

Luo J, Xu Z, Noordam R, van Heemst D, Li-Gao R. Depression and inflammatory bowel disease: a bidirectional two-sample mendelian randomization study. J Crohns Colitis. 2022;16:633–642. https://doi.org/10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjab191 .

Gao X, Tang Y, Lei N et al. Symptoms of anxiety/depression is associated with more aggressive inflammatory bowel disease. Sci Rep. 2021;11:1440. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-81213-8 .

Nicolaides S, Vasudevan A, Long T, van Langenberg D. The impact of tobacco smoking on treatment choice and efficacy in inflammatory bowel disease. Intest Res. 2021;19:158–170. https://doi.org/10.5217/ir.2020.00008 .

Download references

Acknowledgments

We extend our heartfelt thanks to everyone who contributed to the implementation and completion of the questionnaires, which are the most crucial factor for this article.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Baskent University, Ankara, Turkey

Cemile Cansu Alperen

Department of Gastroenterology, Baskent University Adana Medical and Research Center, Adana, Turkey

Barıs Soydas & Ender Serin

Department of Gastroenterology, Baskent University Alanya Medical and Research Center, Alanya, Turkey

Mustafa Erbayrak

Department of Gastroenterology, Baskent University Istanbul Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

Nurten Akyurek Savas

Department of Gastroenterology, Baskent University Konya Medical and Research Center, Konya, Turkey

Gulhan Kanat Unler

Department of Gastroenterology, Baskent University Izmir Medical and Research Center, Izmir, Turkey

Cenk Emre Meral

Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Baskent University, Ankara, Turkey

Ugur Toprak

Department of Gastroenterology, Faculty of Medicine, Baskent University, Ankara, Turkey

Ahmet Sedat Boyacioglu & Ulku Dagli

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Study concept and design: C. Cansu Alperen and Ulku Dagli. Data acquisition: C. Cansu Alperen. Contribution to patient sharing and data collection process: Baris Soydas, Ender Serin, Mustafa Erbayrak, Nurten A. Savas, Gulhan K. Unler, Cenk Emre Meral, Ahmet Sedat Boyacioglu. Data analysis: Ugur Toprak, C. Cansu Alperen. Interpretation of data: C. Cansu Alperen, Ugur Toprak, Ulku Dagli. Drafting of the manuscript: C. Cansu Alperen. Critical revision and approval: Ulku Dagli and C. Cansu Alperen.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cemile Cansu Alperen .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they have no confict of interest.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval from Başkent University Faculty of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (Project No. KA20/306) validated the research’s scientific and ethical basis.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Alperen, C.C., Soydas, B., Serin, E. et al. Role of Environmental Risk Factors in the Etiology of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Multicenter Study. Dig Dis Sci (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-024-08491-w

Download citation

Received : 03 November 2023

Accepted : 08 May 2024

Published : 05 June 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-024-08491-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Crohn’s disease
• Epidemiology
• Inflammatory bowel disease
• Ulcerative colitis
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research