May 18, 2026

Scoping review protocol: Thematic Domains and Methodological Approaches in Qualitative Public Health Research in Vietnam (2020–2025)

DOI
https://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.yxmvm8je6g3p/v1
  • Hung Viet Nguyen1,
  • Truc Ngoc Hoang Dang2,1
  • 1Faculty of Public Health, Da Nang University of Medical Technology and Pharmacy, Da Nang, Vietnam;
  • 2Institute for Population and Social Research, Mahidol University, Thailand
  • Diversity and Intergenerational Caregiving Burdens of the Sandwich Generation in Asia
Truc Ngoc Hoang Dang
Icon indicating open access to content
QR code linking to this content
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.yxmvm8je6g3p/v1
Protocol Citation: Hung Viet Nguyen, Truc Ngoc Hoang Dang 2026. Scoping review protocol: Thematic Domains and Methodological Approaches in Qualitative Public Health Research in Vietnam (2020–2025). protocols.io https://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.yxmvm8je6g3p/v1
License: This is an open access  protocol  distributed under the terms of the  Creative Commons Attribution License,  which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited
Protocol status: Working
We use this protocol and it's working
Created: April 08, 2026
Last Modified: May 18, 2026
Protocol  Integer ID: 314684
Keywords: qualitative research, scoping review, public health, Vietnam, PRISMA-ScR, HIV/AIDS, COVID-19, antimicrobial resistance, non-communicable diseases, thematic analysis, qualitative public health research in vietnam, qualitative public health research, qualitative studies on public health, methodological approaches in qualitative public health research, published qualitative study, public health research, global public health evidence, rigor of qualitative research, illness experience, ongoing health system reform, contribution to global public health evidence, qualitative, widespread use of thematic analysis, scoping review protocol, understanding health behavior, health behavior, rapid digital health expansion, health system, sexual health, vietnam, mental health, health system functioning, pubmed, adherence to reporting standard, scr guideline, reporting standard, methodological approaches method, child health
Abstract
Background: Qualitative research is essential for understanding health behaviors, illness experiences, and health system functioning, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Vietnam—a lower-middle-income country with a population exceeding 100 million—is undergoing concurrent challenges, including persistent infectious diseases, a growing burden of non-communicable diseases, and ongoing health system reforms. The period from 2020 to 2025 was marked by the COVID-19 pandemic, rapid digital health expansion, and increased attention to antimicrobial resistance and mental health. Despite a growing number of internationally published qualitative studies on public health in Vietnam, no scoping review has systematically examined their thematic focus and methodological approaches
Methods: This scoping review followed established methodological frameworks and was reported in accordance with PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Three databases—PubMed (MEDLINE), Europe PMC, and Scopus—were searched in January 2025. Studies were included if they: (1) were published in PubMed- or Scopus-indexed journals; (2) explicitly reported qualitative or mixed-methods designs in the abstract; and (3) were conducted primarily in Vietnam. Methodological quality was assessed using the CASP Qualitative Checklist, and reporting completeness was evaluated using COREQ criteria.
Results: A total of 116 studies met the eligibility criteria from 181 full-text records assessed. The included studies were published between 2020 and 2025, with more than half (57%, n = 66) appearing in the period 2023–2025. Ten thematic clusters were identified: HIV/AIDS and sexual health (n = 14), health systems and policy (n = 18), NCDs and cancer (n = 22), maternal and child health (n = 19), COVID-19 (n = 9), mental health (n = 9), other infectious diseases (n = 11), vaccination (n = 2), antimicrobial resistance and antibiotic use (n = 4), and cross-cutting topics (n = 8). In-depth interviews were the predominant data collection method (n = 115, 99%). Thematic analysis was the most commonly used analytical approach (n = 107, 92%). The use of theoretical frameworks was rare (n = 1, 1%), and reporting of reflexivity was limited (n = 14, 12%).
Conclusions: Qualitative public health research in Vietnam has expanded substantially in both volume and thematic diversity between 2020 and 2025. The literature is characterized by a predominance of in-depth interviews for data collection and widespread use of thematic analysis, alongside limited application of theoretical frameworks. Strengthening capacity in theoretical integration, reflexive practice, and adherence to reporting standards such as COREQ will enhance the rigor of qualitative research in Vietnam and its contribution to global public health evidence.
1. Background and Rationale
Qualitative research provides essential contextual evidence for health policy and program design in low- and middle-income countries. Vietnam—a lower-middle-income country of approximately 100 million people—faces a dual epidemiological burden: ongoing communicable diseases including HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and antimicrobial resistance (AMR), alongside accelerating non-communicable disease (NCD) and cancer transition. The period from 2020 to 2025 encompassed the COVID-19 pandemic, accelerated digital health adoption, and growing recognition of the mental health burden.

Despite expanding publication of qualitative public health research from Vietnam in internationally indexed journals, no scoping review has systematically characterized the thematic domains and methodological approaches of this literature for the 2020–2025 period. This review addresses that gap.
2. Objectives
This review aims to:
1. Identify the thematic domains that characterize qualitative public health research in Vietnam from 2020 to 2025.
2. Examine the study designs, data collection methods, and analytical approaches employed in this body of literature.
3. Review Design
Scoping review following the five-stage framework of Arksey and O'Malley (2005), extended by Levac et al. (2010), and reported using PRISMA-ScR guidelines (Tricco et al., 2018).
PCC Framework
Population/Concept: Public health topics and health services research in Vietnam
Concept: Qualitative or mixed-methods research design and methodology
Context: Vietnam, 2020–2025, internationally indexed journals
4. Search Strategy
Databases: PubMed (MEDLINE), Europe PMC (MEDLINE + PubMed Central), Scopus
Search date: January 2025
Language: English
Keyword Groups (combined with Boolean AND)
Group 1 — Geographic scope (Context):
"Vietnam"[MeSH Terms] OR "Vietnam"[Title/Abstract]
Group 2 — Qualitative methodology (Concept):
"qualitative research"[MeSH] OR "qualitative study"[tiab] OR "in-depth interview"[tiab] OR "focus group"[tiab] OR "thematic analysis"[tiab] OR "phenomenolog*"[tiab] OR "mixed method*"[tiab] OR "key informant"[tiab] OR "grounded theory"[tiab] OR "ethnograph*"[tiab]
Group 3 — Public health domain (Population/Concept):
"public health"[MeSH] OR "health system*"[tiab] OR "health behav*"[tiab] OR "health polic*"[tiab] OR "health service*"[tiab] OR "health promot*"[tiab]
MeSH = Medical Subject Headings (NLM); tiab = title/abstract field tag (PubMed). Equivalent syntax applied in Europe PMC (TITLE_ABS field; SRC:MED OR SRC:PMC) and Scopus (TITLE-ABS-KEY field; DOCTYPE(ar); LANGUAGE(english)). Asterisk (*) = truncation operator.
5. Eligibility Criteria


ABC
CriterionInclusionExclusion
C1 — IndexingPublished in MEDLINE- or Scopus-indexed journalNon-indexed journals
C2 — DesignQualitative or mixed-methods design explicitly described in abstractQuantitative-only studies
C3 — SettingVietnam as primary study site; multi-country only if Vietnam-specific findings independently extractableMulti-country without extractable Vietnam findings; Vietnamese diaspora outside Vietnam
AdditionalEnglish language; peer-reviewed article; 2020–2025; abstract available; public health focusEditorials, letters, conference abstracts; outside date range; no abstract; non-public health focus


6. Study Selection
Records from all three databases were imported into a structured spreadsheet and deduplicated using PMID and DOI matching (110 duplicates removed: 31 PubMed–Europe PMC; 79 Scopus–PubMed/Europe PMC). Eight Europe PMC records were excluded at the initial scan. The remaining 265 records underwent title/abstract screening, applying Criteria 2 and 3. Records meeting eligibility at the title/abstract level proceeded to full-text review. Full-text exclusions were documented with reasons.
Screening and full-text review were conducted by the first author. A random 10% sample (n=12) was independently verified for consistency.
7. Data Extraction
A standardized extraction form was applied to all included studies, capturing:
1. Bibliographic details: first author, year, journal, DOI
2. Study design: qualitative, mixed-methods, or ethnographic
3. Primary data collection method(s): IDI, FGD, ethnographic observation, or combination
4. Analytical approach: thematic analysis, content/framework analysis, or phenomenological
5. Geographic setting: urban or rural/highland
6. Sampling strategy: purposive or snowball/respondent-driven
8. Quality Assessment
Methodological quality was appraised using the CASP Qualitative Checklist (10 domains). Reporting completeness was assessed against the 32-item COREQ checklist. Quality appraisal informed interpretation of findings but was not used as an exclusion criterion, consistent with scoping review methodology (Levac et al., 2010).
9. Data Synthesis and Thematic Clustering
A narrative synthesis was conducted. Studies were organized into ten thematic clusters based on their primary public health focus, determined inductively during data extraction through constant comparison of study objectives, MeSH terms, and abstract content. Labels were iteratively grouped until each cluster demonstrated internal coherence and meaningful differentiation from adjacent clusters; studies resisting clear primary classification were assigned to an "Other cross-cutting topics" cluster. All assignments were cross-validated against each study's MeSH terms and author-stated objectives. Methodological characteristics were summarized descriptively using counts and proportions.
10. Results Summary

AB
ItemResult
Records identified383 (PubMed=140, Europe PMC=48, Scopus=195)
After deduplication & screening265 screened; 181 full-text assessed
Included studies116 studies
Publication period2020–2025; 57% (n=66) published in 2023–2025
Thematic clusters10 clusters (determined inductively)
Largest clustersNCD & Cancer (n=22), MCH (n=19), Health Systems & Policy (n=18)
Primary data collectionIn-depth interviews — IDI (n=115; 99%)
FGD useFocus group discussions (n=59; 51%), mostly combined with IDI
Mixed-methods designs26 studies (22%)
Analytical approachThematic analysis (n=107; 92%)
Theoretical framework1 study (1%) — critical gap
Reflexivity reported14 studies (12%) — significantly underreported
COREQ full adherence16 studies (14%); partial in 86%
Urban setting91 studies (78%)
Rural/highland setting25 studies (22%)

11. Key Conclusions
Vietnam's qualitative public health literature has grown substantially in volume and thematic scope from 2020 to 2025. Strengths include HIV/AIDS care and stigma, COVID-19 community response, and health systems research. Three critical methodological gaps characterize the corpus:
1.  Theoretical framework application is critically rare (1%) — findings remain largely descriptive rather than explanatory
2.  Reflexivity reporting is systematically inadequate (12%)—a substantive validity concern given researcher positionality effects in Vietnamese research contexts
3.  Geographic concentration in urban settings (78%) underrepresents rural and highland populations with the highest unmet health needs. Targeted capacity development addressing these gaps will strengthen Vietnam's qualitative evidence base and its contribution to global public health knowledge.
12. Limitations
Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were not searched. Only English-language publications were included. Vietnamese-language research in domestic journals represents a systematic gap. Data extraction was performed by a single author (10% independent verification). No formal protocol registration was completed prior to the review.