Analysis
MH
Interviews were transcribed by a professional service. We used the NVivo qualitative analysis software (QSR International) to manage the coding. We began analysis while data collection was still underway, allowing us to determine when sufficient interviews had been collected to ensure theoretical saturation—i.e., the point at which the addition of new data did not alter the explanation we were developing [To begin the coding process, each author independently reviewed a subset of 3 transcripts to identify themes. We then met as a team to discuss these themes and formalize them into a codebook—a taxonomy for categorizing qualitative data. Using this codebook, two authors (CD, MH) independently coded the same subset of 6 transcripts and met regularly to compare the coding, discuss the discrepancies, and refine the codebook to rectify ambiguous codes, eliminate redundant codes, and increase the comprehensiveness of the codebook. Having developed a refined codebook and agreement on its use, CD and MH then divided up and single-coded the remaining transcripts. Once this initial coding was complete, CD and MH performed focused coding [Having finished coding, we turned to explanation development. JC and MN undertook explanation development in an abductive process [