In qualitative research, member checking is presented as a way of enhancing trustworthiness of findings. This method consists of soliciting participants’ perspective to verify that collected or analysed data corresponds to their accounts. Obtaining different perspectives on findings could thus help to reduce possible researcher bias. There is, however, very little literature on how to practically conduct member checking and integrate findings. In this paper, we aim to share our experience and reflections on the use of this method within a qualitative study on chronic low back pain and information seeking on Internet. In this study, we used member checking to ensure that data analysis reflected well patients’ experiences and perceptions. More specifically, we drew on Birt and al.’s (2016) Synthesized Member Checking technique to encourage feedback on preliminary results. Out of 21 research participants, 14 provided feedback. Participants’ comments were analysed and taken into account to refine thematic analysis of interviews. This method enabled to build further rapport with participants, as well as question and confirm some of the researcher’s interpretations. By restoring a place where participants’ voices can be heard, we argue that careful member checking could rebalance power relations in research and further participate to the co-construction of findings. Within a critical health psychology framework, it seems crucial to not only inform participants of research findings but also give them the opportunity to react to researcher’s interpretations. However, special attention should be paid to how member checking is implemented to not overburden participants or reinforce power relations.