 |
| Mike Saks and Judith Allsop |
Chapter 16 - Mixed Methods and
Multidisciplinary Research in Health Care
Jonathan Tritter |
| |
|
| |
| Contributor
biography |
| Jonathan Tritter is Chief Executive
of the NHS Centre for Involvement and Reader in The Institute
of Governance and Public Management at Warwick Business
School, UK. His main research interests are patient and
carer experiences of illness and their involvement in
the evaluation and development of services. He continues
to work with colleagues in Finland and across the Nordic
countries. |
| |
| Chapter overview |
| This chapter examines the benefits
and limitations of mixed methods and multidisciplinary
research in health care. It describes mixed methods and
multidisciplinary research, outlining the strengths and
weakness of the approach. It then considers the implications
for research design and project management. |
| |
| Chapter links |
Chapter
2 - Competing Paradigms and Health Research
Chapter 20 - Comparative Health
Research
|
| |
| Suggested
Online Readings |
| Lucke,
J.C., Donald, M., Dower, J., Raphael, B. (2001) ‘Considerations
in the Design of a Mixed-Method Cluster Evaluation of
a Community Programme for 'At-Risk' Young People’,
Evaluation, 7 (1): 110-31. |
| This article discusses the design
of a comprehensive evaluation of a community development
programme for young people 'at-risk' of self-harming behaviour.
It outlines considerations in the design of the evaluation
and focuses on the complexities and difficulties associated
with the evaluation of a community development programme.
The strengths and limitations of a mixed-method evaluation
plan are discussed and recommendations made for the evaluation
of practice in future. |
| |
| Johnstone,
P.L. (2004) ‘Mixed Methods, Mixed Methodology Health
Services Research in Practice’, Qualitative Health
Research, 14 (2): 259-71. |
| This paper explores the mixed methods
and mixed methodology approach to studying organisational
consequences of new artefact adoption in surgery in five
Australian hospitals. The quantitative and qualitative
data were analyzed using inductive and/or deductive reasoning.
|
| |
| Parrado,
E.A., McQuiston, C. and Flippen, C.A. (2005) ‘Participatory
Survey Research: Integrating Community Collaboration and
Quantitative Methods for the Study of Gender and HIV Risks
Among Hispanic Migrants’, Sociological Methods
& Research, 34 (2): 204-39. |
| The article outlines a research strategy
for studying difficult-to-reach migrant populations that
combines community collaboration, targeted random sampling,
and parallel sampling in both sending and receiving areas.
This methodology was applied to the study of gender, migration,
and HIV risks among Hispanic migrants in Durham, North
Carolina. It is argued that community collaboration is
useful in both developing a survey design and providing
a context for understanding of research findings. The
bias that would have resulted from conducting the study
with convenience samples as opposed to a targeted random
sampling technique is also discussed. |
| |
| Further Reading |
| Dixon-Woods, M., Fitzpatrick, R. and
Roberts, K. (2001) ‘Including Qualitative Research
in Systematic Reviews: Opportunities and Problems’,
Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 7:
125-33. |
| This is an interesting consideration
of how qualitative and quantitative evidence can be synthesized
together and influence clinical practice. |
| |
| Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (eds.)
(1997) Grounded Theory in Practice. London: Sage. |
| This book engages explicitly with
the issues of integrating the analysis of different kinds
of data – exemplified by different research projects
with diverse designs and objects of study. |
| |
| Yin, R. and Campbell, D. (2003) Case
Study Research: Design and Methods. 3rd edition. London:
Sage. |
| This definitive book on the case study
as a form of research usefully illustrates how to bring
together a range of methods to generate a holistic understanding
of specific areas. |
| |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
© Sage Publications Ltd.
