A mixed methods study has the potential to produce knowledge that is unavailable to a qualitative study and a quantitative study undertaken independently. Any unique insight or ``yield'' from a mixed methods study may be difficult to assess in practice. However, given that integration of data or findings from different components of a study is a core characteristic of mixed methods research, two possible indicators of yield can be used: first, the extent to which researchers exploit the potential for integration in mixed methods studies; and second, the way in which this integration is communicated in peer-reviewed journal articles. Here, the authors apply these indicators to mixed methods studies in health services research in the United Kingdom.
AcademyHealth.
(2000). Health services research projects in progress. Retrieved May 12, 2005 , from www.academyhealth.org/hsrproj/definitionofhsr.htm
2.
Barbour, R.S.
(1999).
The case for combining qualitative and quantitative approaches in health services research
. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 4(1),
39-43
.
3.
Baum, F.
(1995).
Researching public health: Behind the qualitative-quantitative methodological debate
. Social Science & Medicine, 40(4),
459-468
.
4.
Bowling, A.
(1997). Research methods in health. Investigating health and health services. Buckingham, UK:
Open University Press
.
5.
Brannen, J.
(1992). Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches: An overview. In
J. Brannen
(Ed.), Mixing methods: Qualitative and quantitative research (pp. 3-38).
Aldershot
, UK:
Ashgate
.
6.
Bryman, A.
(1992). Quantitative and qualitative research: Further reflections on their integration. In
J. Brannen
(Ed.), Mixing methods: Qualitative and quantitative research (pp. 57-78).
Aldershot
, UK:
Ashgate
.
7.
Bryman, A.
(2006).
Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done?Qualitative Research, 6,
97-113
.
8.
Bryman, A.
(2007).
Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research
. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1,
8-22
.
9.
Campbell, R.
,
Quilty, B.
, &
Dieppe, P.
(2003).
Discrepancies between patients' assessments of outcome: Qualitative study nested within a randomised controlled trial
. BMJ, 326,
252-253
.
10.
Caracelli, V.J.
, &
Greene, J.C.
(1993).
Data analysis strategies for mixed-method evaluation designs
. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(2),
195-207
.
11.
Caracelli, V.J.
, &
Greene, J.C.
(1997). Crafting mixed-method evaluation designs. In
J. C. Greene
&
V. J. Caracelli
(Eds.), Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms (pp. 19-32).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
.
12.
Creswell, J.W.
,
Fetters, M.D.
, &
Ivankova, N.V.
(2004).
Designing a mixed methods study in primary care. Annals of FamilyMedicine, 2(1),
7-12
.
13.
Datta, L.
(1997). A pragmatic basis for mixed-method designs. In
J. C. Greene
&
V. J. Caracelli
(Eds.), Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms (pp. 33-46).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
.
14.
Erzberger, C.
, &
Kelle, U.
(2003). Making inferences in mixed methods: The rules of integration. In
A. Tashakkori
&
C. Teddlie
(Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 457-488).
London: Sage
.
Fry, G.
,
Chantavanich, S.
, &
Chantavanich, A.
(1981).
Merging quantitative and qualitative research techniques: Toward a new research paradigm
. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 12(2),
145-157
.
17.
Glik, D.C.
,
Parker, K.
,
Muligande, G.
, &
Hategikamana, B.
(1986).
Integrating qualitative and quantitative survey techniques
. International Quarterly of Community Health Education, 7(3),
181-200
.
18.
Greene, J.C.
,
Caracelli, V.J.
, &
Graham, W.F.
(1989).
Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs
. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 11 (3),
255-274
.
19.
Jenkinson, C.
(Ed.). (1997). Assessment and evaluation of health and medical care. A methods text. Buckingham, UK:
Open University Press
.
20.
Krause, N.
(2002).
A comprehensive strategy for developing close-ended survey items for use in studies of older adults
. Journal of Gerontology, 57B(5),
S263-S274
.
21.
Lawrenz, F.
, &
Huffman, D.
(2002).
The archipelago approach to mixed method evaluation
. American Journal of Evaluation, 23(3),
331-338
.
22.
Medical Research Council.
(2000). A framework for development and evaluation of RCTs for complex interventions to improve health.
London: Author
.
23.
Mertens, D.M.
(2003). Mixed methods and the politics of human research: The transformative-emancipatory perspective. In
A. Tashakkori
&
C. Teddlie
(Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 135-164).
London: Sage
.
24.
Morse, J.M.
(2003). Principles of mixed methods and multimethod research design. In
A. Tashakkori
&
C. Teddlie
(Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 189-208).
London: Sage
.
25.
Murphy, E.
,
Dingwall, R.
,
Greatbatch, D.
,
Parker, S.
, &
Watson, P.
(1998). Qualitative research methods in health technology assessment: A review of the literature (No. 2 [16]). CITY?, UK:
Health Technology Assessment
.
26.
O'Cathain, A.
, &
Thomas, K.
(2006). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods . In
C. Pope
&
N. Mays
(Eds.), Qualitative research in health care (3rd ed.,
pp.102-111).
Oxford
, UK:
Blackwell
.
27.
Onwuegbuzie, A.J.
, &
Teddlie, C.
(2003). A framework for analysing data in mixed methods research. In
A. Tashakkori
&
C. Teddlie
(Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 351-383).
London: Sage
.
28.
Parry-Langdon, N.
,
Bloor, M.
,
Audrey, S.
, &
Holliday, J.
(2003).
Process evaluation of health promotion interventions
. Policy & Politics, 31(2),
207-216
.
29.
Patton, M.Q.
(1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.).
London: Sage
.
30.
Pope, C.
, &
Mays, N.
(Eds.). (2000). Qualitative research in health care.
London: BMJ Books
.
31.
Punch, K.F.
(1998). Introduction to social research. Quantitative and qualitative approaches.
London: Sage
.
32.
Sandelowski, M.
(1995).
Triangles and crystals: On the geometry of qualitative research. Research in Nursing &Health, 18,
569-574
.
33.
Sandelowski, M.
(2000).
Combining qualitative and quantitative sampling, data collection, and analysis techniques in mixed-method studies. Research in Nursing &Health, 23,
246-255
.
34.
Sandelowski, M.
(2003). Tables or tableaux? The challenges of writing and reading mixed methods studies. In
A. Tashakkori
&
C. Teddlie
(Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 321-350).
London: Sage
.
35.
Tashakkori, A.
, &
Teddlie, C.
(1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches.
London: Sage
.
36.
Tashakkori, A.
, &
Teddlie, C.
(Eds.). (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research.
London: Sage
.
37.
Teddlie, C.
, &
Tashakkori, A.
(2003). Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioural sciences. In
A. Tashakkori
&
C. Teddlie
(Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 3-50).
London: Sage
.
38.
Teddlie, C.
, &
Yu, F.
(2006).
Mixed methods sampling. A typology with examples
. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1),
77-100
.
39.
Twinn, S.
(2003). Status of mixed methods research in nursing. In
A. Tashakkori
&
C. Teddlie
(Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 541-556).
London: Sage
.
40.
Weinholtz, D.
,
Kacer, B.
, &
Rocklin, T.
(1995).
Salvaging quantitative research with qualitative data
. Qualitative Health Research, 5(3),
388-397
.
