Using remote interview methods for evaluation research on sensitive topics: interviewing non-pregnant survivors of FGM about their health care experiences

This case study discusses an evaluation research project that used mixed methods to explore the impact of a National Health Service (NHS) pilot clinics that were set up to treat non-pregnant women with Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) in England in 2019. The key aim of the evaluation was to determine whether the clinics improved the health outcomes of non-pregnant women with FGM, and this was addressed by using a mixed-methods approach to analyse internal quantitative data and generate qualitative data. Quantitative data analysed included the numbers of service users supported 2019-2021, descriptions of symptoms treated, and procedures undertaken. Qualitative data was generated through remote interview methods, using a semi-structured schedule. Interviews with professionals (n=42) involved in the delivery of the clinics, and survivors (n=12) who had accessed the pilot clinic support were included in the evaluation. Ethical approval was granted through university procedures. This case study focuses specifically upon the qualitative data collection that was undertaken remotely with survivors of FGM. 12 women were interviewed in English via telephone or video-conferencing methods (MS Teams), according to participant preference. It is the process of these remote interviews, and the advantages as well as challenges associated with them that this case study details.