Practical mixed methods strategies used to integrate qualitative and quantitative methods in community-based primary health care research

Abstract

Background Mixed methods (MM) are common in community-based primary health care (CBPHC) research studies. Several strategies have been proposed to integrate qualitative and quantitative components in MM, but they are seldom well conceptualized and described. The purpose of the present review was to identify and describe practical MM strategies and combinations of strategies used to integrate qualitative and quantitative methods in CBPHC research. Methods A methodological review with qualitative synthesis (grouping) was performed. Records published in English in 2015 were retrieved from the Scopus bibliographic database. Eligibility criteria were: CBPHC empirical study, MM research with detailed description of qualitative and quantitative methods and their integration. Data were extracted from included studies and grouped using a conceptual framework comprised of three theoretical types of MM integration, the seven combinations of these types and nine practical strategies (three per type of integration) and multiple combinations of strategies. Results Among the 151 articles reporting CBPHC and MM studies retrieved, 54 (35.7%) met the inclusion criteria for this review. The included studies provided examples of the three theoretical types of MM integration, the seven combinations of these types as well as the nine practical strategies. Overall, 15 combinations of these strategies were observed. No emerging strategy was observed that was not predicted by the conceptual framework. Conclusions This review can provide guidance to CBPHC researchers for planning, conducting and reporting practical strategies and combinations of strategies used for integrating qualitative and quantitative methods in MM research.

A Methodological Review of Mixed Methods Research in Palliative and End-of-Life Care (2014–2019)

“…In line with findings reported in recent reviews [8,26,34], many articles reported a convergent design and cited complementarity as the main rationale for mixing methods. In these studies, the findings of the quantitative and the qualitative components were used to enrich or elaborate on the findings of the other component or to provide further insights.…”

“…A key finding of this review is that the reporting of the mixed methods articles published in the eight journals examined showed a need for improvement. In line with previous reviews [8,35], none of the articles included in our review fulfilled all six GRAMMS criteria and none of the six criteria was fulfilled by all the articles. The reporting quality was not consistent across the six criteria, with variations according to the particular mixed methods feature being examined.…”

“…[3][4][5][6][7][8][9] Building and connecting, by using the qualitative findings to inform the Delphi content and sampling. Merging through narrative [p. [3][4][5][6][7][8][9] Mixed methods enabled researchers to sequentially develop and select the items of the alert thermometer. It also allowed incorporation of views and experiences of a wide range of participants [pp.…”

“…However, two limitations apply to the current state of knowledge of the use of mixed methods research in palliative care. First, in the seven years since the last review was undertaken, a considerable number of new mixed methods studies may have been published (coinciding with the considerable increase in the application of mixed methods research in health sciences, as noted by Kaur and colleagues [8]). Second, neither of the two reviews mentioned above examined the reporting quality of the studies under review to determine the extent to which they provide sufficient and transparent information on the design, data collection, analysis and integration procedures used [9].…”

Factors Correlated with Practices Regarding Care of Dengue Patients Among Nurses from 94 Primary Care Units in a High- Risk Province in Southern Thailand

“…A cross-sectional mixed-methods study 17 , 18 was chosen for the quantitative component of this research. We assessed factors such as personal information, experience, knowledge, attitude and practices regarding DPC among nurses in PCUs.…”