scholarly journals Metadata Correction: Clinical Validation of Heart Rate Apps: Mixed-Methods Evaluation Study (Preprint)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thijs Vandenberk ◽  
Jelle Stans ◽  
Christophe Mortelmans ◽  
Ruth Van Haelst ◽  
Gertjan Van Schelvergem ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Rate ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Evaluation Study ◽  
Clinical Validation ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation

scholarly journals Clinical Validation of Heart Rate Apps: Mixed-Methods Evaluation Study

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (8) ◽  
pp. e129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thijs Vandenberk ◽  
Jelle Stans ◽  
Christophe Mortelmans ◽  
Ruth Van Haelst ◽  
Gertjan Van Schelvergem ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Rate ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Evaluation Study ◽  
Clinical Validation ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation

scholarly journals Metadata Correction: Clinical Validation of Heart Rate Apps: Mixed-Methods Evaluation

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. e19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thijs Vandenberk ◽  
Jelle Stans ◽  
Christophe Mortelmans ◽  
Ruth Van Haelst ◽  
Gertjan Van Schelvergem ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Rate ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Clinical Validation ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation

scholarly journals Implementation of a screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment programme for risky substance use in South African emergency centres: A mixed methods evaluation study

PLoS ONE ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (11) ◽  
pp. e0224951 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire van der Westhuizen ◽  
Bronwyn Myers ◽  
Megan Malan ◽  
Tracey Naledi ◽  
Marinda Roelofse ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Substance Use ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
South African ◽  
Brief Intervention ◽  
Evaluation Study ◽  
Treatment Programme ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation

scholarly journals Mixed Methods Evaluation - A Chinese Cancer Screening Program

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 816-816
Author(s):  
Su-I Hou
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
Intervention Mapping ◽  
Evaluation Study ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation ◽  
Cancer Screening Program ◽  
Phase Complex ◽  
Multi Phase

Abstract This paper introduces the rapidly growing modern mixed methods research (MMR) and its application in a Chinese cancer screening program. While some previous researchers have incorporated quantitative and qualitative data in research, recent mixed methods developments have provided significant clarity that can guide those new to the MMR field. Understanding the context for using MMR and examining a complex mixed methods evaluation study in Taiwan can help illustrate opportunities for and application of mixed methods in Asians. The Taiwan Cervical Cancer Screening Education Program is used as an exemplar of a multi-phase complex mixed methods evaluation study showcasing various MMR designs. These include an exploratory sequential design to develop culturally sensitive study instrument, iterative concurrent and sequential mixed methods for intervention mapping, and an embedded mixed methods evaluation design to assess impact. Visual diagrams are introduced to facilitate communication of mixed methods design procedures and products in each phase.

scholarly journals Implementing change in primary care practice: lessons from a mixed-methods evaluation of a frailty initiative

BJGP Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. bjgpopen18X101421 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Bryce ◽  
Joanna Fleming ◽  
Joanne Reeve
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Complex Interventions ◽  
Evaluation Study ◽  
Models Of Care ◽  
Normalisation Process Theory ◽  
Care Practice ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation

BackgroundThe NHS is facing increasing needs from an aging population, which is acutely visible in the emerging problem of frailty. There is growing evidence describing new models of care for people living with frailty, but a lack of evidence on successful implementation of these complex interventions at the practice level.AimThis study aimed to determine what factors enable or prevent implementation of a whole-system, complex intervention for managing frailty (the PACT initiative) in the UK primary care setting.Design & settingA mixed-methods evaluation study undertaken within a large clinical commissioning group (CCG). Design and analysis was informed by normalisation process theory (NPT).MethodData collection from six sites included: observation of delivery, interviews with staff, and an online survey. NPT-informed analysis sought to identify enablers and barriers to implementation of change.ResultsSeven themes were identified. PACT was valued by professionals and patients but a lack of clarity on its aims was identified as a barrier to implementation. Successful implementation relied on champions pushing the work forward, and dealing with unanticipated resistance. Contracts focused on delivery of service outcomes, but these were sometimes at odds with professional priorities. Implementation followed evidence-informed rather than evidence-based practice, requiring redesign of the intervention and potentially created a new body of knowledge on managing frailty.ConclusionSuccessful implementation of complex interventions in primary care need inbuilt capacity for flexibility and adaptability, requiring expertise as well as evidence. Professionals need to be supported to translate innovative practice into practice-based evidence.

scholarly journals Methodological Challenges of Mixed Methods Intervention Evaluations

Methodology ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 119-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hennie R. Boeije ◽  
Sarah J. Drabble ◽  
Alicia O’Cathain
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Evaluation Studies ◽  
Complex Interventions ◽  
Evaluation Study ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation ◽  
Methodological Challenges ◽  
Research Designs ◽  
Combination Of Methods ◽  
Equal Interest

Abstract. This paper addresses the methodological challenges that accompany the use of a combination of research methods to evaluate complex interventions. In evaluating complex interventions, the question about effectiveness is not the only question that needs to be answered. Of equal interest are questions about acceptability, feasibility, and implementation of the intervention and the evaluation study itself. Using qualitative research in conjunction with trials enables us to address this diversity of questions. The combination of methods results in a mixed methods intervention evaluation (MMIE). In this article we demonstrate the relevance of mixed methods evaluation studies and provide case studies from health care. Methodological challenges that need our attention are, among others, choosing appropriate designs for MMIEs, determining realistic expectations of both components, and assigning adequate resources to both components. Solving these methodological issues will improve our research designs and provide further insights into complex interventions.

Correction: Medication Adherence Reminder System for Virtual Home Assistants: Mixed Methods Evaluation Study (Preprint)

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cynthia F Corbett ◽  
Elizabeth M Combs ◽  
Peyton S Chandarana ◽  
Isabel Stringfellow ◽  
Karen Worthy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Medication Adherence ◽  
Evaluation Study ◽  
Reminder System ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation

UNSTRUCTURED REMOVE

Implementing an interprofessional model of self-management support across a community workforce: A mixed-methods evaluation study

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Tino Kulnik ◽  
Heide Pöstges ◽  
Lucinda Brimicombe ◽  
John Hammond ◽  
Fiona Jones
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Evaluation Study ◽  
Self Management ◽  
Management Support ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document