Combining the power of stories and the power of numbers: Mixed methods research and mixed studies reviews

Annual Review of Public Health

Volumn 35, Issue , 2014, Pages 29-45

  Pluye, Pierre ^a   Hong, Quan Nha ^a  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Critical appraisal; Epistemology; Methodology; Mixed methods; Systematic literature review

Indexed keywords

CONFERENCE PAPER; EPISTEMOLOGY; HUMAN; PLANNING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; QUANTITATIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RESEARCH; STUDY DESIGN; SYNTHESIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; METHODOLOGY; PUBLIC HEALTH;

HUMANS; PUBLIC HEALTH; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84897063471     PISSN: 01637525     EISSN: 15452093     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032013-182440     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (91)

1. Abbott A. 1988. The System of Professions. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
2. Abbott A. 1998. The causal devolution. Sociol. Methods Res. 27:148-81
3. Armstrong R, Waters E, Doyle J. 2008. Reviews in public health and health promotion. In Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, ed. JPT Higgins, S Green, pp. 593-606. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell
4. Belanger E, Rodriguez C, Groleau D. 2011. Shared decision-making in palliative care: A systematic mixed studies review using narrative synthesis. Palliat. Med. 25:242-61
5. Bindiganavile Sridhar S. 2011. In pursuit of a valid information assessment method. Master's diss. McGill Univ., Montreal. 92 pp.
6. Boaz A, Ashby D, Denyer D, Egan M, Harden A, et al. 2006. A multitude of syntheses: A comparison of five approaches from diverse policy fields. Evid. Policy 2:479-502
7. Boyatzis RE. 1998. Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
8. Boyko JA, Lavis JN, Abelson J, Dobbins M, Carter N. 2012. Deliberative dialogues as a mechanism for knowledge translation and exchange in health systems decision-making. Soc. Sci. Med. 75:1938-45
9. Bryman A. 2006. Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qual. Res. 6:97-113
10. Buelens M, Woestyne M, Mestdagh S, Bouckenooghe D. 2008. Methodological issues in negotiation research: A state-of-The-Art-review. Group Decis. Negot. 17:321-45
11. Campbell DT. 1988. Qualitative knowing in action research. In Methodology and Epistemology for Social Science: Selected Papers of Donald T. Campbell, ed. S Overman, pp. 360-76. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
12. Campbell F, Johnson M, Messina J, Guillaume L, Goyder E. 2011. Behavioural interventions for weight management in pregnancy: A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative data. BMC Public Health 11:491
13. Carr SM, Lhussier M, Forster N, Geddes L, Deane K, et al. 2011. An evidence synthesis of qualitative and quantitative research on component intervention techniques, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, equity and acceptability of different versions of health-related lifestyle advisor role in improving health. Health Technol. Assess. 15:iii-iv
14. Chang Y, Voils CI, Sandelowski M, Hasselblad V, Crandell JL. 2009. Transforming verbal counts in reports of qualitative descriptive studies into numbers. West. J. Nurs. Res. 31:837-52
15. Classen S, Lopez EDS. 2006. Mixed methods approach explaining process of an older driver safety systematic literature review. Top. Geriatr. Rehabil. 22:99-112
16. Coles E, Themessl-Huber M, Freeman R. 2012. Investigating community-based health and health promotion for homeless people: A mixed methods review. Health Educ. Res. 27:624-44
17. Contandriopoulos D, Lemire M, Denis JL, Tremblay E. 2010. Knowledge exchange processes in organizations and policy arenas: A narrative systematic review of the literature. Milbank Q. 88:444-83
18. Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL. 2010. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 2nd ed.
19. Creswell JW, Klassen AC, Plano Clark VL, Clegg Smith K. 2011. Best Practices for MixedMethods Research in the Health Sciences. Bethesda, MD: Off. Behav. Soc. Sci. Res., Natl. Inst. Health
20. Dagenais C, Nault-Briere F,DupontD,Dutil J. 2008. Implementation and effects of a service coordination program for youths and their families in complex situations: A mixed evaluation design. Child Youth Serv. Rev. 30:903-13
21. Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. 1994. Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
22. Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Jones D, Young B, Sutton A. 2005. Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: A review of possible methods. J. Health Serv. Res. Policy 10:45-53
23. Dixon-Woods M, Cavers D, Agarwal S, Annandale E, Arthur A, et al. 2006. Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 6:35
24. Fries CJ. 2009. Bourdieu's reflexive sociology as a theoretical basis for mixed methods research: An application to complementary and alternative medicine. J. Mix. Methods Res. 3:326-48
25. Grant MJ, Booth A. 2009. A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info. Libr. J. 26:91-108
26. Greene JC. 2006. Toward a methodology of mixed methods social inquiry. Res. Sch. 13:93-98
27. Greene JC. 2008. Is mixed methods social inquiry a distinctive methodology? J. Mix. Methods Res. 2:7-22
28. Greenhalgh T, Potts HW, Wong G, Bark P, Swinglehurst D. 2009. Tensions and paradoxes in electronic patient record research: A systematic literature review using the meta-narrative method. Milbank Q. 87:729-88
29. Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O. 2004. Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q. 82:581-629
30. Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O, Peacock R. 2005. Storylines of research in diffusion of innovation: A meta-narrative approach to systematic review. Soc. Sci. Med. 61:417-30
31. Groleau D, Pluye P, Nadeau L. 2007. A mix-method approach to the cultural understanding of distress and the non-use of mental health services. J. Ment. Health 16:731-41
32. Hacking I. 1999. The Social Construction of What? Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
33. Hall B, Howard K. 2008. A synergistic approach: conducting mixed methods research with typological and systemic design considerations. J. Mix. Methods Res. 2:248-69
34. Harden A, BruntonG, Fletcher A,Oakley A. 2009. Teenage pregnancy and social disadvantage: systematic review integrating controlled trials and qualitative studies. BMJ 339:b4254
35. Heyvaert M, Maes B, Onghena P. 2013. Mixed methods research synthesis: definition, framework, and potential. Qual. Quant. 47:659-76
36. Huberman AM, Miles MB. 1991. Analyse des donnees qualitatives: recueil de nouvelles methodes. Bruxelles: De Boeck Univ.
37. Jagosh J, Macaulay A, Pluye P, Salsberg J, Bush P, et al. 2012. Uncovering the benefits of participatory research: implications of a realist review for health research and practice. Milbank Q. 90:311-46
38. Jagosh J, Pluye P, Macaulay A, Salsberg J, Henderson J, et al. 2011. Assessing the outcomes of participatory research: protocol for identifying, selecting, appraising and synthesizing the literature for realist review. Implement. Sci. 6:24
39. Jagosh J, Pluye P, Wong G, Cargo M, Salsberg J, et al. 2014. Critical reflections on realist review: insights from customizing the methodology to the needs of participatory research assessment. Res. Synthesis Methods. In press
40. Johnson RB. 2008. Editorial: Living with tensions: the dialectic approach. J. Mix. Methods Res. 2:203-7
41. Johnson RB, Onwuegbuzie AJ, Turner LA. 2007. Toward a definition of mixed methods research. J. Mix. Methods Res. 1:112-33
42. Kennedy F, McDonnell A, Gerrish K, Howarth A, Pollard C, Redman J. 2012. Evaluation of the impact of nurse consultant roles in the United Kingdom: A mixed methods systematic literature review. J. Adv. Nurs. 68:721-42
43. KompierMAJ, Cooper CL, Geurts SAE. 2000. A multiple case study approach to work stress prevention in Europe. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 9:371-400
44. Kuhn T. 1983. La structure des revolutions scientifiques. Paris: Flammarion
45. Lakshman R, Ogilvie D, Ong KK. 2009. Mothers' experiences of bottle feeding: A systematic review of qualitative and quantitative studies. Arch. Dis. Child. 94:596-601
46. Lewis SA, Noyes J,Mackereth S. 2010. Knowledge and information needs of young people with epilepsy and their parents: mixed-method systematic review. BMC Pediatr. 10:103
47. Mays N, Pope C, Popay J. 2005. Systematically reviewing qualitative and quantitative evidence to inform management and policy-making in the health field. J. Health Serv. Res. Policy 10(Suppl. 1):6-20
48. McEvoy P, Richards D. 2006. A critical realist rationale for using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods. J. Res. Nurs. 11:66-78
49. Mills EJ, Seely D, Rachlis B, Griffith L, Wu P, et al. 2006. Barriers to participation in clinical trials of cancer: A meta-Analysis and systematic review of patient-reported factors. Lancet Oncol. 7:141-48
50. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. 2009. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann. Intern. Med. 151:264-69, W64
51. Morgan DL. 2007. Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. J. Mix. Methods Res. 1:48-76
52. Neuendorf KA. 2002. The Content Analysis Guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
53. Newman TB. 2003. The power of stories over statistics. BMJ 327:1424-27
54. Niglas K. 2010. The multidimensional model of research methodology: An integrated set of continua. See Ref. 83, pp. 215-36
55. Noblit GW,Hare RD. 1988. Meta-Ethnography: Synthesising Qualitative Studies. Newbury Park,CA: Sage
56. O'Cathain A. 2010. Assessing the quality ofmixedmethods research: towards a comprehensive framework. See Ref. 83, pp. 531-55
57. O'Cathain A, Murphy E, Nicholl J. 2010. Three techniques for integrating data inmixedmethods studies. BMJ 341:1147-50
58. Oliver S, Harden A, Rees R, Shepherd J, Brunton G, et al. 2005. An emerging framework for including different types of evidence in systematic reviews for public policy. Evaluation 11:428-46
59. Pace R, Pluye P, Bartlett G, Macaulay AC, Salsberg J, et al. 2012. Testing the reliability and efficiency of the pilotMixedMethods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) for systematic mixed studies review. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 49:47-53
60. Patton MQ. 2002. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
61. Pawson R, GreenhalghT,Harvey G, Walshe K. 2005. Realist review-A newmethod of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. J. Health Serv. Res. Policy 10(Suppl. 1):21-34
62. Pluye P. 2013. Critical appraisal tools for assessing the methodological quality of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies included in systematic mixed studies reviews. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 19(4):722
63. Pluye P. 2012. Les methodes mixtes. In Approches et pratiques en evaluation de programme, ed. V Ridde, C Dagenais, pp. 125-43. Montreal: Press. Univ. Montreal
64. Pluye P. 2012.Methodes mixtes en sante mondiale. In Regards croises sur la socio-Anthropologie reflexive et la recherche en sante mondiale, ed. JC Suarez-Herrera, MJ Blain, pp. 129-35. Montreal: Cahiers sci. ACFAS
65. Pluye P,GagnonMP, Griffiths F, Johnson-Lafleur J. 2009. A scoring system for appraisingmixedmethods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in mixed studies reviews. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 46:529-46
66. Pluye P, Grad R, Repchinsky C, Jovaisas B, Johnson-Lafleur J, et al. 2013. Four levels of outcomes of information-seeking: Amixedmethods study in primary health care. J.Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 64:108-25
67. Pluye P, Grad RM, Dunikowski LG, Stephenson R. 2005. Impact of clinical information-retrieval technology on physicians: A literature review of quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies. Int. J. Med. Inform. 74:745-68
68. Pluye P, Grad RM, Levine A, Nicolau B. 2009. Understanding divergence of quantitative and qualitative data (or results) in mixed methods studies. Int. J. Mult. Res. Approaches 3:58-72
69. Pluye P, Robert E, Cargo M, Bartlett G, O'Cathain A, et al. 2011. Proposal: A mixed methods appraisal tool for systematic mixed studies reviews. McGill Univ., Montreal. http://mixedmethodsappraisaltoolpublic. pbworks.com/f/MMAT%202011%20criteria%20and%20tutorial%202011-06-29.pdf. Arch. by WebCite R- at http://www.webcitation.org/5tTRTc9yJ
70. Pope C, Mays N, Popay J. 2007. Synthesizing Qualitative and Quantitative Health Evidence: A Guide to Methods. Adelaide: Ramsay
71. Porta M, ed. 2008. A Dictionary of Epidemiology. New York: Oxford Univ. Press. 5th ed.
72. Rihoux B, Marx A, ed. 2013. QCA, 25 years after "The Comparative Method": mapping, challenges, and innovations-mini-symposium. Polit. Res. Q. 66:167-235
73. Rihoux B, Ragin CC. 2009. Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
74. Rivard S, Lapointe L. 2012. Information technology implementers' responses to user resistance: nature and effects. MIS Q. 36:897-920
75. Roberts KA, Dixon-Woods M, Fitzpatrick R, Abrams KR, Jones DR. 2002. Factors affecting uptake of childhood immunisation: A Bayesian synthesis of qualitative and quantitative evidence. Lancet 360:1596-99
76. Rosewilliam S, Roskell CA, Pandyan AD. 2011. A systematic review and synthesis of the quantitative and qualitative evidence behind patient-centred goal setting in stroke rehabilitation. Clin. Rehabil. 25:501-14
77. Saini M, Shlonsky A. 2012. Overview of mixed-method systematic review designs. In Systematic Synthesis of Qualitative Research, ed. M Saini, A Shlonsky, pp. 1-14. New York: Oxford Univ. Press
78. Sandelowski M, Barroso J, Voils CI. 2007. Using qualitative metasummary to synthesize qualitative and quantitative descriptive findings. Res. Nurs. Health 30:99-111
79. Sayer A. 2000. Realism and Social Science. London: Sage
80. Schwandt TA. 2007. The SAGE Dictionary of Qualitative Inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 3rd ed.
81. Scott PJ, Briggs JS. 2009. A pragmatist argument for mixed methodology in medical informatics. J. Mix. Methods Res. 3:223-41
82. Sheldon TA. 2005. Making evidence synthesis more useful for management and policy-making. J. Health Serv. Res. Policy 10(Suppl. 1):1-5
83. Tashakkori A, Teddlie C. 2010. Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
84. Thomas J, Harden A, Oakley A, Oliver S, Sutcliffe K, et al. 2004. Integrating qualitative research with trials in systematic reviews. BMJ 328:1010-12
85. Vogt DS,KingDW, King LA. 2004. Focus groups in psychological assessment: enhancing content validity by consulting members of the target population. Psychol. Assess. 16:231-43
86. Voils C, Hasselblad V, Crandell J, Chang Y, Lee E, Sandelowski M. 2009. A Bayesian method for the synthesis of evidence from qualitative and quantitative reports: the example of antiretroviral medication adherence. J. Health Serv. Res. Policy 14:226-33
87. Wang HF, Yeh MC. 2012. Psychological resistance to insulin therapy in adults with type 2 diabetes: mixed-method systematic review. J. Adv. Nurs. 68:743-57
88. Weber M. 1995. Economie et societe: les categories de la sociologie. Paris: Plon
89. Wong G, GreenhalghT,WesthorpG, Buckingham J, Pawson R. 2013. RAMESES publication standards: meta-narrative reviews. BMC Med. 11:20
90. Wong G, GreenhalghT,WesthorpG, Buckingham J, Pawson R. 2013. RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med. 11:21
91. Yin RK, Bingham E, Heald KA. 1976. The difference that quality makes: the case of literature reviews. Sociol. Method. Res. 5:139-56