We discuss how to think about qualitative and quantitative approaches to research in general and the value of home health research in particular. We describe several lesser known research or pernicious biases and the challenge of reasoned interpretations of data from research studies. We advocate policies that allow individuals to receive home-based care grounded in strong, objective scientific evidence and support critical thinking about implementation of care.
GagliardiADobrowMJ. Paucity of qualitative research in general medical and health services and policy research journals: analysis of publication rates. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;11:268. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-11-268.
2.
ShuvalKHarkerKRoudsariB. Is qualitative research second class science? A quantitative longitudinal examination of qualitative research in medical journals. PLoS ONE. 2011;6(2):e16937. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0016937.
3.
GardnerH. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York, NY: Basic Books; 1993.
4.
IoannidisJPA. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2005;2(8):e124. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124.
5.
GoldacreB. Bad Science: Quacks, Hacks, and Big Pharma Flacks. London, England: Fourth Estate; 2008.
6.
MaddoxJRandiJStewartWW. “High-dilution” experiments a delusion. Nature. 1988;334(6180):287-290.
7.
RosaLRosaESarnerLBarrettS. A close look at therapeutic touch. JAMA. 1998;279(13):1005-1010.
