 The paper examines sample size justification in qualitative research within three health-related journals over a 15-year period. The findings demonstrate that sample size efficiency is limited, often without justification, and relates to the journal of publication. Sample size was most frequently defended with reference to saturation and pragmatic considerations. The authors recommend that researchers be more transparent about evaluating their sample size sufficiency and that data adequacy should be appraised with reference to features intrinsic to the study at hand. Reviews also have a vital role in supporting and encouraging transparent study-specific reporting.