Integrating Multidisciplinary Results to Produce New Knowledge About the Physician–Patient Relationship

Abstract

The INTERMEDE Project brought together a number of research teams to study the interaction between a patient and their general practitioner, and how this can produce social inequalities in health. The ultimate objective of the project was to formalize a core of common findings by integrating qualitative and quantitative results. The methodology chosen for the integration was inspired by the Delphi participatory method. It involves several rounds of questions and feedback in writing between all members of project teams, in order to compare contradictory opinions and identify key concepts arising from the project. This interdisciplinary research has provided a more nuanced understanding of the mechanisms underlying physician–patient interaction by revealing the convergences of the various disciplinary approaches.

Reported Methodological Challenges in Empirical Mixed Methods Articles: A Review on JMMR and IJMRA

“…The quality of qualitative data in a mixed methods study is of paramount importance for integration because qualitative data can be perceived as overly subjective to be integrated with quantitative data. To facilitate integration, some researchers purposively collected multiple types of qualitative data from different groups of participants “to provide cross-checked data” (Youngs & Piggot-Irvine, 2012, p. 189) before mixing them with quantitative data (DeCuir-Gunby et al, 2012; Kennett et al, 2008; Schieber et al, 2017). Teye (2012) explained the advantages of using multiple sources for qualitative data in his study as follows: The two qualitative methods—interviews and focus group discussions—complemented each other.…”

“…Many researchers were cognizant how well-coordinated teamwork could contribute to their mixed methods research implementation, including emergent design, participants’ recruitment, data analysis, and integration process (Corden & Hirst, 2008; Fauser, 2018; Kington et al, 2011; Konig, 2019; Linnander et al, 2019; Schieber et al, 2017; Watkins et al, 2017; Youngs et al, 2012). By contrast, poor teamwork might lead to compartmentalization of roles and responsibilities that can hinder the integration of findings (Bryman, 2007).…”

“…Many readers are prone to misunderstand that high-quality mixed methods research should always yield convergent findings. In fact, it is very common for researchers to obtain conflicting results from the quantitative and qualitative strands in a mixed methods study (see Table 4; Alatinga & Williams, 2019; Bustamante, 2019; David et al, 2018; DeCuir-Gunby et al, 2012; Goodwin et al, 2013; Leal et al, 2018; Mayoh et al, 2012; Schieber et al, 2017; Slonim-Nevo & Nevo, 2009; Teye, 2012; Yu, 2012). This implies a major challenge regarding how to tackle with conflicting findings emerged from mixing qualitative and quantitative results.…”

The Journal of Mixed Methods Research Starts a New Decade

“…Dialectical pluralism provides a way for researchers, practitioners, and other stakeholders to work together and produce new workable “wholes” while, concurrently, thriving on differences and intellectual tensions. Schieber et al (2017) from the field of health sciences describe a project studying the interaction between a patient and their general practitioner and how this can produce social inequalities in health. The methodology chosen for the integration of qualitative and quantitative methods is inspired by the Delphi participatory method that involves several rounds of questions and feedback in writing between all members of project teams to compare contradictory opinions and identify key concepts.…”

Response to letter by Zhijie Xu: Why should mixed methods matter to primary care physicians and other providers?

“…The mixed methods journal, the Journal of Mixed Methods Research , edited by the primary care physician, Dr Michael Fetters, at the University of Michigan also publishes mixed methods studies addressing topics in primary care. See, for example, the insightful article about patient and provider (general physician) relationships in the article by Schieber, Kelly-Irving, Genolini, et al 4. You can also see the list of primary care projects funded by the National Institute of Health in their searchable database called RePORT (National Institute of Health, NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools), https://report.nih.gov).…”