Mixing it but not mixed-up: Mixed methods research in medical education (a critical narrative review)

Abstract

Background: Some important research questions in medical education and health services research need 'mixed methods research' ( particularly synthesizing quantitative and qualitative findings). The approach is not new, but should be more explicitly reported. Aim: The broad search question here, of a disjointed literature, was thus: What is mixed methods research -how should it relate to medical education research?, focused on explicit acknowledgement of 'mixing'. Methods: Literature searching focused on Web of Knowledge supplemented by other databases across disciplines. Findings: Five main messages emerged:-Thinking quantitative and qualitative, not quantitative versus qualitative -Appreciating that mixed methods research blends different knowledge claims, enquiry strategies, and methods -Using a 'horses for courses' [whatever works] approach to the question, and clarifying the mix -Appreciating how medical education research competes with the 'evidence-based' movement, health services research, and the 'RCT' -Being more explicit about the role of mixed methods in medical education research, and the required expertise Conclusion: Mixed methods research is valuable, yet the literature relevant to medical education is fragmented and poorly indexed. The required time, effort, expertise, and techniques deserve better recognition. More write-ups should explicitly discuss the 'mixing' ( particularly of findings), rather than report separate components.

Qualities of Qualitative Research: Part I

“…The best approach will depend on the kind of question asked, and the best methods will be those most appropriate to the question. 4 To learn more about this topic, the references below are a useful start, as is talking to colleagues engaged in qualitative research at your institution or in your specialty. …”

“…The unique or outlier response has value in contributing to understanding the experience of others, and thus individual responses are not lost in the aggregation of findings or in the development of research group consensus. 2,4 Qualitative methods acknowledge the ''myth of objectivity'' between researcher and subjects of study. 7 In fact, the researcher is unlikely to be a purely detached observer.…”

“…3 Qualitative research has often been differentiated from quantitative as hypothesis generating rather than hypothesis testing. 4 Qualitative research methods ''explore, describe, or generate theory, especially for uncertain and 'immature' concepts; sensitive and socially dependent concepts; and complex human intentions and motivations.'' 4 In education, qualitative research strives to understand how learning occurs through close study of small numbers of learners and a focus on the individual.…”

“…Generally, qualitative research is concerned with cases rather than variables, and understanding differences rather than calculating the mean of responses. 4 In-depth interviews, focus groups, case studies, and open-ended questions are often employed to find these answers. A qualitative study is concerned with the point of view of the individual under study.…”

Identification of clinician challenges in order to drive the development of competency-based education: results from an international needs assessment in multiple sclerosis

“…13 The study protocol involved triangulation in order to gain several perspectives of the same problem and to ensure validity and trustworthiness of findings. 13,14 In this case, triangulation of analytical approaches (qualitative and quantitative), data collection methods (interviews and survey) and data sources (neurologists, nurses, radiologists and pharmacists) was used.…”