Introduction: Appraising the quality of studies included in systematic reviews combining qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies is challenging. To address this challenge, a critical appraisal tool was developed: the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The aim of this paper is to present the MMAT. Development: The MMAT was developed in 2006 and was subject to pilot and interrater reliability testing. A revised new version of the MMAT was developed using the results from usefulness testing as well as a literature review on critical appraisal tools and a modified e-Delphi study with methodological experts to identify the core relevant criteria to include in the MMAT. Tool description: The MMAT includes quality criteria of five categories of study designs: (a) qualitative, (b) randomized controlled trial, (c) nonrandomized, (d) quantitative descriptive and (e) mixed methods studies. The MMAT focuses on core relevant methodological criteria and has five criteria per category of study design. Conclusion: The MMAT offers an alternative solution by proposing a unique tool that can appraise the quality of different study designs. Also, by limiting to core criteria, the MMAT can provide a more time efficient appraisal.

Objective: The mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) was developed for critically appraising different study designs. This study aimed to improve the content validity of three of the five categories of studies in the MMAT by identifying relevant methodological criteria for appraising the quality of qualitative, survey, and mixed methods studies.Study Design and Setting: First, we performed a literature review to identify critical appraisal tools and extract methodological criteria. Second, we conducted a two-round modified e-Delphi technique. We asked three method-specific panels of experts to rate the relevance of each criterion on a five-point Likert scale.Results: A total of 383 criteria were extracted from 18 critical appraisal tools and a literature review on the quality of mixed methods studies, and 60 were retained. In the first and second rounds of the e-Delphi, 73 and 56 experts participated, respectively. Consensus was reached for six qualitative criteria, eight survey criteria, and seven mixed methods criteria. These results led to modifications of eight of the 11 MMAT (version 2011) criteria. Specifically, we reformulated two criteria, replaced four, and removed two. Moreover, we added six new criteria.Conclusion: Results of this study led to improve the content validity of this tool, revise it, and propose a new version (MMAT version 2018). Ó

No abstract

No abstract

This study examined Spanish young people's gender-stereotyped beliefs and attitudes about people working in the field of information and communications technology (ICT). For this purpose, their positive, negative, and neutral perceptions of the associated characteristics of these workers were also analyzed. Likewise, the use of masculine, feminine, or neutral expressions to describe these professionals was explored. The existence of gender differences in these aspects was also investigated. 900 students from Catalonia (51 % girls) enrolled in the last course of junior secondary education (mean of age=15 years old; S.D.=1.73) participated in a survey with close and open-ended questions. Content analysis of responses to an open-ended question indicated that the boys and girls held several stereotypical beliefs about ICT professionals (a highly male-dominated field), but they also reported counter-stereotypical beliefs about them. As expected, these stereotypical beliefs described a masculine portrayal of ICT workers. Contrary to expectations, most of the students' portrayals of people working in ICT were either positive or neutral, not negative. Likewise and opposite to predictions, young males did not show more positive attitudes towards ICT professionals than girls. In fact, both girls and boys evaluated more positively than negatively the different descriptive aspects associated with ICT professionals. In support of expectations, most boys and girls referred to masculine role models working in ICT. No gender differences were observed in the type of characteristics associated with ICT professionals. However, young females were more likely to offer feminine references about professions where ICT is the tool rather than the object of their work. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings within the context of Spain are discussed.

The aim of this article is to introduce family medicine researchers to case study research, a rigorous research methodology commonly used in the social and health sciences and only distantly related to clinical case reports. The article begins with an overview of case study in the social and health sciences, including its definition, potential applications, historical background and core features. This is followed by a 10-step description of the process of conducting a case study project illustrated using a case study conducted about a teaching programme executed to teach international family medicine resident learners sensitive examination skills. Steps for conducting a case study include (1) conducting a literature review; (2) formulating the research questions; (3) ensuring that a case study is appropriate; (4) determining the type of case study design; (5) defining boundaries of the case(s) and selecting the case(s); (6) preparing for data collection; (7) collecting and organising the data; (8) analysing the data; (9) writing the case study report; and (10) appraising the quality. Case study research is a highly flexible and powerful research tool available to family medicine researchers for a variety of applications.

Mixed methods research has been increasingly recognized as a useful approach for describing and explaining complex issues in palliative care and end-of-life research. However, little is known about the use of this methodology in the field and the ways in which mixed methods studies have been reported. The purpose of this methodological review was to examine the characteristics, methodological features and reporting quality of mixed methods articles published in palliative care research. The authors screened all articles published in eight journals specialized in palliative care between January 2014 and April 2019. Those that reported a mixed methods study (n = 159) were included. The Good Reporting of a Mixed Methods Study (GRAMMS) criteria were used to assess reporting quality. Findings showed that 57.9% of the identified studies used a convergent design and 82.4% mentioned complementarity as their main purpose for using a mixed methods approach. The reporting quality of the articles generally showed a need for improvement as authors usually did not describe the type of mixed methods design used and provided little detail on the integration of quantitative and qualitative methods. Based on the findings, recommendations are made to improve the quality of reporting of mixed methods articles in palliative care.

The purpose of this qualitative multiple case study is to describe and compare how researchers in the education, nursing, psychology, and sociology disciplines operationalize and conceptualize the quality of mixed methods research (MMR). An international sample of 44 MMR researchers representing these four disciplines were interviewed. The study findings point to (a) two perspectives from which the quality of MMR is understood, one contingent and flexible and the other universal and fixed; (b) a relationship between these two perspectives and the participants’ discipline; and (c) a similar occurrence, both in terms of nature and frequency, of the MMR quality criteria most mentioned by the participants across disciplines. Implications of the findings for the field of MMR are discussed.