Integration and Publications as Indicators of "Yield" From Mixed Methods Studies

Abstract

A mixed methods study has the potential to produce knowledge that is unavailable to a qualitative study and a quantitative study undertaken independently. Any unique insight or ``yield'' from a mixed methods study may be difficult to assess in practice. However, given that integration of data or findings from different components of a study is a core characteristic of mixed methods research, two possible indicators of yield can be used: first, the extent to which researchers exploit the potential for integration in mixed methods studies; and second, the way in which this integration is communicated in peer-reviewed journal articles. Here, the authors apply these indicators to mixed methods studies in health services research in the United Kingdom.

Processo De Priorização De Ocorrências No Serviço De Atendimento Móvel De Urgência

“…Esta estratégia foi escolhida, a fim de identificar/buscar corroboração na análise dos diferentes tipos de dados (19) .…”

Moving From Randomized Controlled Trials to Mixed Methods Intervention Evaluations

“…We drew a similar conclusion from our review of the use of qualitative research with trials (O'Cathain et al, 2013), as well as identifying examples of visible integration. his lack of visible integration is not surprising given the paucity of visible integration of data or indings within mixed methods studies generally in health research (O'Cathain et al, 2007), but it is disappointing given the potential value of the qualitative research to the endeavor of generating evidence of efectiveness. A challenge to all researchers engaged in mixed methods intervention evaluations is to explicitly report in journal articles the "yield" or insights gained from undertaking qualitative research and RCTs within the same study.…”

“…For this to happen, one method must inluence in some way the objectives, sampling, data collection, analysis, or interpretation of the other method within the study (O'Cathain, Murphy, & Nicholl, 2007). Within mixed methods intervention evaluations, the expectation is that the qualitative research should help to optimize the intervention to be trialed, improve the eiciency and ethics of the trial conducted, increase the internal validity of the trial by ensuring the right outcomes are measured in the right way, help interpret trial results, or facilitate the transferability of the trial indings to contexts outside the trial (O'Cathain et al, 2013).…”

Methodological Challenges of Mixed Methods Intervention Evaluations

“…For this to happen, one method must influence in some way the objectives, sampling, data collection, analysis, or interpretation of the other method within the study (O'Cathain, Murphy & Nicholl, 2007;Small, 2011). Within mixed methods intervention evaluations, the expectation is that the qualitative research will work to enhance the trial (O'Cathain et al, 2013;Popay & Williams, 1998;Song, Sandelowski & Happ, 2010).…”

“…A challenge to all researchers engaged in mixed methods intervention evaluations is to explicitly report in journal articles the 'yield' or insights gained from undertaking qualitative research and RCTs within the same study (Boeije et al, 2013;O'Cathain et al, 2007).…”