In mixed methods research (MMR), integrating the quantitative and the qualitative components of a study is assumed to result in additional knowledge (or “yield”). This narrative review examines the extent to which MMR is used in the field of childhood trauma and provides directions for improving mixed methods studies in this field. A systematic literature search resulted in 13 studies that were achieving four different research objectives: (a) measures and meaning, (b) intervention evaluation, (c) theory building, and (d) measurement instrument development and validation. Although some studies produced yield by integrating the components, there is room for improvement and better use of MMR’s potential. We conclude by presenting recommendations for improving the application and dissemination of MMR in childhood trauma.
AlisicE.JongmansM.J.Van WeselF.KleberR.J. (2011). Building child trauma theory from longitudinal studies: A meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 31, 736-747.
2.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., Text rev.). Washington, DC: Author.
3.
BromD.Pat-HorenczykR.FordJ. D. (2009). Treating traumatized children. Risk, resilience and recovery. London, England: Routledge.
4.
BrymanA. (2007). Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 8-22. doi:10.1177/2345678906290531
5.
BrymanA.BeckerS.SempikJ. (2008). Quality criteria for quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods research: A view from social policy. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11, 261-276. doi:10.1080/13645570701401644
6.
CaracelliV. J.GreeneJ. C. (1997). Crafting mixed–method evaluation designs. In GreeneJ. C.CaracelliV. J. (Eds.), Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms (pp. 19-32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
7.
*CharlesN.Butera-PrinziF.PerleszA. (2007). Families living with acquired brain injury: A multiple family group experience. NeuroRehabilitation, 22, 61-76.
8.
CreswellJ. W.FettersM. D.IvankovaN. V. (2004). Designing a mixed methods study in primary care. Annals of Family Medicine, 2, 7-12. doi:10.1370/afm.104
9.
CreswellJ. W.Plano ClarkV. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
CreswellJ. W.ZhangW. (2009). The application of mixed methods designs to trauma research. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 22, 612-621. doi:10.1002/jts.20479
11.
FeeneyT. J.YlvisakerM. (2003). Context-sensitive behavioral supports for young children with TBI. Short-term effects and long-term outcome. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 18, 33-51. doi:10.1097/00001199-200301000-00006
12.
ForbesD.CreamerM. C.BissonJ. I.CohenJ. A.CrowB. E.FoaE. F.. . . UrsanoR. J. (2010). A guide to guidelines for the treatment of PTSD and related conditions. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 23, 537-552. doi:10.1002/jts.20565
13.
GannonN.SunH. (2010, July). Mixed methods: The two-way street between theory and practice in mixed methods design. Paper presented at the Sixth Mixed Methods International Conference, Baltimore, MD.
14.
*GaskellS. L. (2007). The challenge of evaluating rehabilitative activity holidays for burn-injured children: Qualitative and quantitative outcome data from a Burns Camp over a five-year period. Developmental Neurohabilitation, 10, 149-160. doi:10.1080/13638490701217610
15.
González CastroF.KellisonJ. G.BoydS. J.KopakA. (2010). A methodology for conducting integrative mixed methods research and data analyses. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(4), 342-360.
16.
*HaightW.BlackJ.SheridanK. (2010). A mental health intervention for rural, foster children from methamphetamine-involved families: Experimental assessment with qualitative elaboration. Children and Youth Services Review, 32, 1446-1457. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.06.024
17.
*HaightW.MarshallJ.HansS.BlackJ.SheridanK. (2010). “They mess with me, I mess with them”: Understanding physical aggression in rural girls and boys from methamphetamine-involved families. Children and Youth Services Review, 32, 1223-1234. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.04.010
18.
HeyvaertM.MaesB.OnghenaP. (2011). Mixed methods research synthesis: Definition, framework, and potential. Quality & Quantity, 47, 659-676. doi:10.1007/s11135-011-9538-6
19.
IvankovaK.KawamuraK. (2010). Emerging trends in the utilization of integrated designs in the social, behavioral, and health sciences. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 581-612). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
20.
*JonesL.KafetsiosK. (2002). Assessing adolescent mental health in war-effected societies: The significance of symptoms. Child Abuse & Neglect, 26, 1059-1080. doi:10.1016/S0145-2134(02)00381-2
21.
*JonesL.KafetsiosK. (2005). Exposure to political well-being in Bosnian adolescents: A mixed method approach. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 10, 157-176. doi:10.1177/1359104505051209
22.
LewinS.GlentonC.OxmanA. D. (2009). Use of qualitative methods alongside randomised controlled trials of complex healthcare interventions: Methodological study. British Medical Journal, 339, b3496. doi:10.1136/bmj.b3496
23.
*London BocknekE.SandersonJ.BritnerP. A.IV. (2008). Ambiguous loss and posttraumatic stress in school-age children of prisoners. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 18, 323-333. doi:10.1007/s10826-008-9233-y
24.
MalterudK. (2001). The art and science of clinical knowledge: Evidence beyond measures and numbers. Lancet, 358, 397-400. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05548-9
25.
MertensD. (2007). Transformative paradigm: Mixed methods and social justice. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 212-225. doi:10.1177/1558689807302811
26.
*MillerK. E. (1996). The effects of state terrorism and exile on indigenous Guatemalan refugee children: A mental health assessment and an analysis of children’s narratives. Child Development, 67, 89-106. doi:10.2307/1131688
27.
*MillerK. E.FernandoG. A.BergerD. E. (2009). Daily stressors in the lives of Sri Lankan youth: A mixed methods approach to assessment in a context of war and natural disaster. Intervention, 9, 187-203. doi:10.1097/WTF.0b013e3283346344
28.
Moran-EllisJ.AlexanderV. D.CroninA.DickinsonM.FieldingJ.SleneyJ.ThomasH. (2006). Triangulation and integration: Processes, claims and implications. Qualitative Research, 6, 45-59. doi:10.1177/1468794106058870
29.
*NyamukapaC. A.GregsonS.WambeM.MushoreP.LopmanB.MupambireyiZ.. . . JukesM. C. H. (2010). Causes and consequences of psychological distress among orphans in eastern Zimbabwe. AIDS Care, 22, 988-996. doi:10.1080/09540121003615061
30.
O’CathainA.MurphyE.NichollJ. (2007). Integration and publications as indicators of “yield” from mixed methods studies. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 147-163. doi:10.1177/1558689806299094
31.
O’CathainA.MurphyE.NichollJ. (2008). The quality of mixed methods studies in health services research. Journal of Health Services Research Policy, 13, 92-98. doi:10.1258/jhsrp.2007.007074
32.
O’CathainA.MurphyE.NichollJ. (2010). Three techniques for integrating data in mixed methods studies. British Medical Journal, 341, c4587. doi:10.1136/bmj.c4587
33.
*OstlerT.HaightW.BlackJ.ChoiG.KingeryL.SheridanK. (2007). Case series: Mental health needs and perspectives of rural children reared by parents who abuse methamphetamine. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 46, 500-507. doi:10.1097/chi.0b013e3180306298
34.
ÖstlundU.KiddL.WengströmY.Rowa-DewarN. (2010). Combining qualitative and quantitative research within mixed method research designs: A methodological review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 48, 369-383. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2010.10.005
35.
PaceR.PluyeP.BartlettG.MacaulayA. C.SalsbergJ.JagoshJ.SellerR. (2012). Testing the reliability and efficiency of the pilot Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) for systematic mixed studies review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 49, 47-53. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.07.002
36.
PetticrewM.RobertsH. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences. A practical guide. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
37.
PluyeP.GagnonM.GriffithsF.Johnson-LafleurJ. (2009). A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in mixed studies reviews. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46, 529-546. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.01.009
38.
PluyeP.GradR. M.LevineA.NicolauB. (2009). Understanding divergence of quantitative and qualitative data (or results) in mixed methods studies. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 3, 58-72. doi:10.5172/mra.455.3.1.58
39.
PopeC.MaysN. (1995). Reaching the parts other methods cannot reach: An introduction to qualitative methods in health and health services research. British Medical Journal, 311, 42-45. doi:10.1136/bmj.311.6996.42
40.
*RobertsY. H.MitchellM. J.WitmanM. M. N.TaffaroC. (2010). Mental health symptoms in youth affected by hurricane Katrina. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 41, 10-18. doi:10.1037/a0018339
41.
SmallM. L. (2011). How to conduct a mixed methods study: Recent trends in a rapidly growing literature. Annual Review of Sociology, 37, 57-86. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102657
42.
TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
43.
WeselF. vanBoeijeH.R.AlisicE.DrostS. (2012). I’ll be working my way back: a qualitative synthesis on the trauma experience of children. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice & Policy, 4(5): 516-526. doi: 10.1037/a0025766
44.
WigginsB. (2011). Confronting the dilemma of mixed methods. Journal of Theoretical & Philosophical Psychology, 31, 44-60. doi:10.1037/a0022612
