Mixed methods have become increasingly popular in health-related research, allowing a broader and deeper understanding of complex human phenomena. This growth in popularity has increased the range of usage and complexity in design approaches, producing greater need for understanding of logistical and practical application in this field. This paper aims to provide an overview of mixed methods research and orientate readers to the critical issues that arise for researchers. It provides an introduction to mixed methods design and the rationale and philosophical underpinnings for this methodological approach. It navigates the reader through some real world or ‘hot’ topics within mixed methods, including data analysis, integration and quality appraisal criteria.
BazeleyP (2012) Integrative analysis strategies for mixed data sources. American Behavioral Scientist56(6): 814–828.
2.
BishopFL (2015a) Using mixed methods in health research: Benefits and challenges. British Journal of Health Psychology20(1): 1–4.
3.
BishopFL (2015b) Using mixed methods research designs in health psychology: An illustrated discussion from a pragmatist perspective. British Journal of Health Psychology20(1): 5–20.
4.
BrymanA (2006) Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done?Qualitative Research6(1): 97–113.
5.
BrymanA (2007) Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research1(1): 8–22.
6.
BrymanA (2008) Why do researchers integrate/combine/mesh/blend/mix/merge/fuse quantitative and qualitative research? In: BergmanMM (ed.) Advances in Mixed Methods Research, London: SAGE, pp. 87–100.
7.
CollingridgeDS (2013) A primer on quantitized data analysis and permutation. Journal of Mixed Methods Research7(1): 81–97.
8.
CreswellJW (2015a) A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
9.
CreswellJW (2015b) Revisiting mixed methods and advancing scientific practices. In: Hesse-BiberSJohnsonRB (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Multimethod and Mixed Methods Research Inquiry, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 61–71.
CreswellJWPlano ClarkVLGarrettGL (2008) Methodological issues in conducting mixed methods research designs. In: BergmanMM (ed.) Advances in Mixed Methods Research, London: SAGE, pp. 66–83.
12.
CreswellJWPlano ClarkVLGutmannML (2003) Advanced mixed methods research designs. In: TashakkoriATeddlieC (eds) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 209–240.
13.
Doyle L, Brady AM and Byrne G (2009) An overview of mixed methods research. Journal of Research in Nursing 14(2): 175–185.
14.
DoyleL (2015) Mixed methods. In: HenlySJ (ed.) Routledge International Handbook of Advanced Quantitative Methods in Nursing Research, Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 411–422.
15.
DrabbleSJO’CathainA (2015) Moving from randomized controlled trials to mixed methods intervention evaluations. In: Hesse-BiberSJohnsonRB (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Multimethod and Mixed Methods Research Inquiry, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 406–425.
16.
FarmerTRobinsonKElliottSJ (2006) Developing and implementing a triangulation protocol for qualitative health research. Qualitative Health Research16(3): 377–394.
17.
FeilzerMY (2010) Doing mixed methods research pragmatically: Implications for the rediscovery of pragmatism as a research paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research4(1): 6–16.
18.
FettersMDCurryLACreswellJW (2013) Achieving integration in mixed methods designs – principles and practices. Health Services Research48(6): 2134–2156.
19.
GiddingsLS (2006) Mixed-methods research: Positivism dressed in drag. Journal of Research in Nursing11(3): 195–203.
20.
GreeneJC (2007) Mixed Methods in Social Inquiry, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Boss.
21.
GreeneJCCaracelliVJGrahamWF (1989) Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis11(3): 255–274.
22.
Hesse-BiberS (2015) Introduction. Navigating a turbulent research landscape: Working the boundaries, tensions, diversity, and contradictions of multimethod and mixed methods inquiry. In: Hesse-BiberSJohnsonRB (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Multimethod and Mixed Methods Research Inquiry, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. xxxii–liii.
23.
HoweKR (1988) Against the quantitative–qualitative incompatibility thesis or dogmas die hard. Educational Researcher17(8): 10–16.
24.
IvankovaNV (2014) Implementing quality criteria in designing and conducting a sequential QUAN-QUAL mixed methods study of student engagement with learning applied research methods online. Journal of Mixed Methods Research8(1): 25–51.
25.
JellesmarkAForysth HerlingSEgerodI (2012) Fear of falling and changed functional ability following hip fracture among community-dwelling elderly people: An explanatory sequential mixed methods study. Disability and Rehabilitation34(25): 2124–2131.
26.
JohnsonRBOnwuegbuzieAJ (2004) Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher33(7): 14–26.
27.
LeeCRowlandsIJ (2015) When mixed methods produce mixed results: Integrating disparate findings about miscarriage and women’s wellbeing. British Journal of Health Psychology20(1): 36–44.
28.
McCabeCRocheDHegartyF (2013) ‘Open Window’: A randomized trial of the effect of new media art using a virtual window on quality of life in patients experiencing stem cell transplantation. Psycho-Oncology22(2): 330–337.
29.
MaxwellJA (2010) Using numbers in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry16(6): 475–482.
30.
MaxwellJAMittapalliK (2010) Realism as a stance for mixed methods research. In: TashakkoriATeddlieC (eds) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioural Research, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 145–167.
MorganD (2007) Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research1(1): 48–76.
33.
MorseJM (2015) Issues in qualitatively-driven mixed methods designs: Walking through a mixed-methods project. In: Hesse-BiberSJohnsonRB (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Multimethod and Mixed Methods Research Inquiry, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 206–222.
34.
O’CathainA (2010) Assessing the quality of mixed methods research: Toward a comprehensive framework. In: TashakkoriATeddlieC (eds) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioural Research, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 531–555.
35.
O’CathainAMurphyENichollJ (2010) Three techniques for integrating data in mixed methods studies. BMJ341: c4587.
36.
SaferD (1997) Self-reported suicide attempts by adolescents. Annals of Clinical Psychiatry9(4): 263–269.
37.
SaleJEMLohfeldLHBrazilK (2002) Revisiting the quantitative–qualitative debate: Implications for mixed-methods research. Quality and Quantity36(1): 43–53.
38.
SandelowskiM (1996) Using qualitative methods in intervention studies. Research in Nursing & Health19(4): 359–364.
39.
SandelowskiM (2014) Unmixing mixed-methods research. Research in Nursing & Health37(1): 3–8.
40.
Shannon-BakerP (2015) Making paradigms meaningful in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research. Epub ahead of print 20 March 2015. DOI: 10.1177/1558689815575861.
41.
StoddartKBuggeCShepherdA (2014) The new clinical leadership role of senior charge nurses: A mixed methods study of their views and experiences. Journal of Nursing Management22(1): 49–59.
42.
StollerEPWebsterNJBlixenCE (2009) Alcohol consumption decision among nonabusing drinkers diagnosed with hepatitis C: An exploratory sequential mixed methods study. Journal of Mixed Methods Research3(1): 65–86.
43.
TashakkoriATeddlieC (2008) Quality of inferences in mixed methods research: Calling for an integrative framework. In: BergmanMM (ed.) Advances in Mixed Methods Research: Theories and Applications, London: SAGE, pp. 101–119.
44.
TeddlieCTashakkoriA (2003) Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences. In: TashakkoriATeddlieC (eds) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 3–50.
