scholarly journals Quantitative Methods in Participatory Research

2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann C. Macaulay ◽  
Justin Jagosh ◽  
Pierre Pluye ◽  
Paula L. Bush ◽  
Jon Salsberg
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Research Methodology ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Consensus Building ◽  
Recent Systematic Review ◽  
Study Designs

In this paper, we suggest that participatory research (PR) is neither a research methodology, nor uniquely associated with qualitative methods, but rather an approach to research through which stakeholders can implement quantitative, qualitative or mixed methods study designs. By illustrating three partnerships retained in our recent systematic review of PR, we highlight issues involved in partnered quantitative research. Examples demonstrate that commitment to dialogue and consensus building among partnership stakeholders is key to ensuring that methods generate scientifically valid research without creating community harm, loss of reputation, stigma or without generating feelings of denial, betrayal and exclusion.

Musculoskeletal triage: a mixed methods study, integrating systematic review with expert and patient perspectives

Physiotherapy ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 100 (4) ◽  
pp. 277-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Joseph ◽  
D. Morrissey ◽  
M. Abdur-Rahman ◽  
A. Hussenbux ◽  
C. Barton
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Patient Perspectives

scholarly journals Predictors and Consequences of Veterans Affairs Mental Health Provider Burnout: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study

10.2196/18345 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. e18345
Author(s):  
Kara Zivin ◽  
Jennifer Kononowech ◽  
Matthew Boden ◽  
Kristen Abraham ◽  
Molly Harrod ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Expert Panel ◽  
Veterans Affairs ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Mental Health Provider ◽  
Health Administration

Background In the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), mental health providers (MHPs) report the second highest level of burnout after primary care physicians. Burnout is defined as increased emotional exhaustion and depersonalization and decreased sense of personal accomplishment at work. Objective This study aims to characterize variation in MHP burnout by VHA facility over time, identifying workplace characteristics and practices of high-performing facilities. Methods Using both qualitative and quantitative methods, we will evaluate factors that influence MHP burnout and their effects on patient outcomes. We will compile annual survey data on workplace conditions and annual staffing as well as productivity data to assess same and subsequent year provider and patient outcomes reflecting provider and patient experiences. We will conduct interviews with mental health leadership at the facility level and with frontline MHPs sampled based on our quantitative findings. We will present our findings to an expert panel of operational partners, Veterans Affairs clinicians, administrators, policy leaders, and experts in burnout. We will reengage with facilities that participated in the earlier qualitative interviews and will hold focus groups that share results based on our quantitative and qualitative work combined with input from our expert panel. We will broadly disseminate these findings to support the development of actionable policies and approaches to addressing MHP burnout. Results This study will assist in developing and testing interventions to improve MHP burnout and employee engagement. Our work will contribute to improvements within VHA and will generate insights for health care delivery, informing efforts to address burnout. Conclusions This is the first comprehensive, longitudinal, national, mixed methods study that incorporates different types of MHPs. It will engage MHP leadership and frontline providers in understanding facilitators and barriers to effectively address burnout. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/18345

A Systematic Methodological Review of Hierarchical Linear Modeling in Mixed Methods Research

2020 ◽  
pp. 155868982093788
Author(s):  
Kirstie L. Bash ◽  
Michelle C. Howell Smith ◽  
Pam S. Trantham
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Hierarchical Linear Modeling ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Linear Models ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Linear Modeling ◽  
Methodological Review ◽  
Design Choice

The use of advanced quantitative methods within mixed methods research has been investigated in a limited capacity. In particular, hierarchical linear models are a popular approach to account for multilevel data, such as students within schools, but its use and value as the quantitative strand in a mixed methods study remains unknown. This article examines the role of hierarchical linear modeling in mixed methods research with emphasis on design choice, priority, and rationales. The results from this systematic methodological review suggest that hierarchical linear modeling does not overshadow the contributions of the qualitative strand. Our study contributes to the field of mixed methods research by offering recommendations for the use of hierarchical linear modeling as the quantitative strand in mixed methods studies.

scholarly journals Does Quantitative Research in Child Maltreatment Tell the Whole Story? The Need for Mixed-Methods Approaches to Explore the Effects of Maltreatment in Infancy

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel Glass ◽  
Ruchika Gajwani ◽  
Fiona Turner-Halliday
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Child Maltreatment ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Quantitative Measurement ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Semistructured Interviews ◽  
Qualitative Exploration

Background and Aims.Research on child maltreatment has largely overlooked the under-five age group and focuses primarily on quantitative measurement. This mixed-methods study of maltreated children (N=92) entering care (age 6–60 months) combines a quantitative focus on the associations between care journey characteristics and mental health outcomes with a qualitative exploration of maltreatment in four different families.Methods.Care journey data was obtained from social care records; mental health and attachment assessments were carried out following entry to care; qualitative data comprised semistructured interviews with professionals, foster carers, and parents.Results.Significant associations were found between suspected sexual abuse and increased DAI inhibited attachment symptoms (p=0.001) and between reported domestic violence and decreased DAI inhibited (p=0.016) and disinhibited (p=0.004) attachment symptoms. Qualitative results: two themes demonstrate the complexity of assessing maltreatment: (1) overlapping maltreatment factors occur in most cases and (2) maltreatment effects may be particularly challenging to isolate. Conclusions.Qualitative exploration has underscored the complexity of assessing maltreatment, indicating why expected associations were not found in this study and posing questions for the quantitative measurement of maltreatment in general. We therefore suggest a new categorisation of maltreatment and call for the complimentary research lenses of further mixed-methods approaches.

Article Commentary: Mixed Methods in Visitor Studies Research

2000 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven S. Yalowitz ◽  
Marcella D. Wells
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Visitor Studies ◽  
Quantitative Research Methods ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative Methods ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Research Studies

In visitor studies, there has been some debate about the use of qualitative versus quantitative research methods. Many evaluators understand the advantages and disadvantages of both methods, but deciding on the most appropriate method can still be problematic. This article summarizes the tenets of both qualitative and quantitative methods and provides examples of visitor studies for each. It also reviews several research studies that have successfully used mixed methods to evaluate visitors.

scholarly journals Barriers, enablers and strategies for the treatment and control of hypertension in Nepal: a mixed-methods systematic review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raja Ram Dhungana ◽  
Zeljko Pedisic ◽  
Achyut Raj Pandey ◽  
Nipun Shrestha ◽  
Maximilian de Courten
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Health System ◽  
Family Support ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Illness Perception ◽  
Hypertension Treatment ◽  
Barriers And Enablers ◽  
Adherence To Medication ◽  
And Control

Abstract Background: The challenge of achieving effective treatment and control of blood pressure is linked to various barriers to hypertension care at different layers of health system (HS). Evidence is emerging globally on the effectiveness of multi-pronged hypertension control strategies. However, no systematic review of strategies of and factors associated with hypertension treatment and control in Nepal is available. Understanding country-specific factors influencing hypertension care is critical to address the gaps in the management of hypertension. This study aimed to systematically review published literature and synthesise the findings on barriers, enablers and strategies for hypertension treatment and control in Nepal. Methods: Six databases namely Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, ProQuest and WorldCat, Nepali journals and Nepal government websites were systematically searched for qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies investigating the factors or strategies in relation to hypertension treatment and control in Nepal. The methodological quality of selected articles was assessed using Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Themes on barriers and enablers were generated and framed under “health system” , “provider” and “patient” domains, according to the framework synthesis approach. Findings on hypertension strategies were narratively synthesised. Results: We identified 14 published studies; one with mixed, three with qualitative and 10 with quantitative methods. Eight were related to barriers and enablers and six of hypertension strategies. The identified barriers associated with the HS were: lack of affordable services and lack of resources. The barriers at the provider’s level were: communication gaps and long waiting hours for appointments. Poor help-seeking behaviour, non-adherence to medication, perceived side-effects of drugs, financial hardship and lack of family support were barriers identified at patient level. The following enablers were identified: positive illness perception, free essential healthcare services and family support. Strategies implemented across the HS, provider and patient were: establishing digital health records at health centres, health worker’s capacity development, health education and yoga practice. Conclusion: There is a range of barriers for hypertension treatment and control in Nepal pertaining to the HS, providers, and patients. Comprehensive interventions are needed at all three levels to further improve management and control of hypertension in Nepal.Registration: The protocol is registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020145823)

scholarly journals Bricolage research in history education as a scholarly mixed-methods design

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather Sharp
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
History Education ◽  
Data Gathering ◽  
Mixed Methods Design ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative Methods ◽  
Discipline Area

Research using a mixed-methods design is increasingly becoming the norm, crossing the myriad of educational fields of research, including history education. While commonly interpreted as a combining of qualitative and quantitative methods, mixed methods in history education can also extend to a bricolage approach, whereby the epistemological aspect of research is explicitly used to frame a study incorporating a combination of interdisciplinary methodologies and theoretical underpinnings. It extends beyond the often asserted binary of qualitative and quantitative research. In considering directions of qualitative research in the broad discipline area of education, the work of researchers such as Kincheloe (2005) and Denzin and Lincoln (2005) is used throughout this paper within a qualitative research context based on the work of Kincheloe and Tobin (2006). Adopting their approach of investigating the complexity of the lived world means placing research within a number of contexts. Research can be framed – from conceptualization to data gathering to analysis – in a range of contexts, appropriately matched between stage of research and underpinning theories. This paper reports on how bricolage can be used to frame research in history education.

Using Mixed Methods Research to Better Understand Pediatric Feeding Disorder

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 1623-1630
Author(s):  
Kelsey L. Thompson ◽  
Wanqing Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Interdisciplinary Teams ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Feeding Disorder ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Heterogenous Population ◽  
Pediatric Feeding ◽  
Study Designs

Purpose Mixed methods research is a relatively new, but growing, research methodology with particular relevance to speech-language pathologists because of its utility in translating research into practice. Mixed methods research involves collection of both qualitative and quantitative data, which is integrated to gain a deeper understanding of a research question, particular population or intervention, or to develop a tool. In particular, pediatric feeding disorder (PFD) research stands to benefit from this methodology to comprehensively and holistically report on this population. Conclusions This article focuses on introducing researchers new to mixed methods, as well as clinicians, to the four basic mixed methods study designs and considerations. To establish a foundational understanding, examples of published work specific to PFD are incorporated and a framework for understanding mixed method study design is proposed. Then, the four designs are examined from the lens of critical appraisal, so that clinicians and researchers are well prepared to critically evaluate mixed methods studies. Finally, applications of mixed methods to PFD are explored, with a commentary on how published examples could be extended using mixed methods designs. This article provides researchers and clinicians with a basic understanding of mixed methods as well as a clear avenue for its application to PFD. Mixed methods has the potential to advance our understanding of the heterogenous population PFD impacts, improve our use of interdisciplinary teams, examine holistic interventions, and develop tools for clinical and research use.

Analysis of Publication Decisions for Journal of Research in Music Education Manuscripts (2009–2014)

2016 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy L. Sims ◽  
Jackie Lordo ◽  
Cynthia Williams Phelps
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Music Education ◽  
Research Methodology ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Comparable Data ◽  
Research Methodologies ◽  
Publication Decision

The primary purpose of this study was to investigate characteristics of manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Research in Music Education ( JRME) representing various research methodologies. A database was compiled comprising all manuscripts that received a publication decision from February 2009 through March 2014 ( N = 506). Only submissions that went through the complete review process ( n = 423) were analyzed and included quantitative, qualitative, historical, and mixed methods research. The proportions of the 125 articles accepted for publication during this timeframe by research methodology category included 29.39% of the quantitative submissions and 27.41% of the qualitative submissions. Quantitative research represented 65.95% of submissions and 66.40% of acceptances, and qualitative represented 29.39% of submissions and 27.20% of acceptances. Historical studies and mixed methods studies each accounted for very small proportions of submissions and acceptances. Comparisons of the summative judgments that reviewers provided for the quantitative and qualitative articles when recommending against acceptance also were examined and found to be comparable. Data indicate that publications decisions were not systematically related to research methodology.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document