Examining Methods and Designs Discussion
Research methods and designs provide frameworks for answering foreground questions, testing hypotheses, and explaining relationships between independent and dependent variables. According to Scholtz, de Klerk & de Beer (2020), quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method (multi-method) research designs influence how researchers collect and analyze data. In this case, inappropriate selection of research methods and designs can compromise how researchers utilize their research skills and affect the credibility of research findings and the subsequent development of theories. Amidst the significance of the three broad research methods, this paper compares three studies that satisfy the criteria for quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method research methods and designs.
PLACE YOUR ORDER HERE NOW
Description of the Characteristics Associated with the Method of Each Article
In the article “A mental health home visit service partnership intervention on improving patients’ Satisfaction,” Cheng et al. (2018) conducted a quantitative study investigating a partnership intervention between community-based and hospital-based visits to improve patient satisfaction. As quantitative research, the study emphasized quantifiable data collection and analysis methods to establish participants’ satisfaction with mental health home visit services. Emphasis on quantifiable data is the primary characteristic of quantitative research methods. In the second study, “Chronic drug treatment among hemodialysis patients: A qualitative study of Patients, nursing, and medical staff attitudes and Approaches,” Gilad et al. (2020) adopted qualitative methodologies to investigate patients’ and staff’s concepts and attitudes regarding medication care. The study targeted to investigate non-quantifiable aspects, including participants’ attitudes and concepts regarding medical care. According to Busetto, Wick & Gumbinger (2020)Examining Methods and Designs Discussion, qualitative research methods are appropriate for answering the why questions and studying the nature of phenomena. Also, qualitative research methods are vital in assessing perspectives of the studied phenomena.
In the third article, Factors influencing hand hygiene practice of nursing students: A Descriptive, mixed-methods Study,” Zimmerman et al. (2020) conducted multi-method research to explore theoretical knowledge of infection prevention and control (IPC) of nursing students and nursing students and clinical facilitators’ perceptions of factors influencing these practices during clinical placements. According to Wasti et al. (2022), mixed-methods research balances qualitative and quantitative methods to answer the why and how questions and provide more robust inferences about the studied research question or phenomenon.
Description of the Characteristics Associated with the Design of Each Article
In the quantitative study, Cheng et al. (2018) adopted a time series quasi-experimental study design. The researchers used the “Scale of Satisfaction with the Mental Health Home Visit Service of the patients” to explore pre-and-post intervention levels of patients’ satisfaction with various mental health visit services. Other elements of a quantitative design applied in the study include purposive sampling and assigning participants to experimental and control groups. On the other hand, Gilad et al. (2020) applied various aspects of a qualitative study, including semi-structured in-depth interviews and a combination of open-ended and closed questions to obtain insights from staff members and patients in a dialysis unit. These strategies are consistent with the need to explore patients’ and staff members’ thoughts and attitudes regarding the role and process of medication use. Examining Methods and Designs Discussion
Finally, Zimmerman et al. (2020) applied elements of quantitative and qualitative research Designs, including a non-probability purposive sampling of all Year 1, 2, and 3 nursing students enrolled in the Bachelor of Nursing Degree at an Australian University, memos to document researchers’ thoughts, feelings, and reflections, an anonymous paper-based validated questionnaire, and semi-structured interviews to assess facilitators’ experiences and perceptions nursing students’ IPC practice during clinical placement.
Description of the Statistical Analysis Associated with the Method and Design of Each Article
Cheng et al. (2018) statistically analyzed data using SSPS Version 2.0 and identified statistical significance when p<0.05. They described clinical status, demographic, and satisfaction scores using various measures, including standard deviation, mean, and percentage (Cheng et al., 2018). Further, the researchers assessed inter-group differences in demographics, clinical status, and satisfaction scores using pre-tests and t-tests. Finally, researchers used a Chi-square test to examine qualitative variables.
Conversely, Gilad et al. (2020) did not statistically analyze the participants’ responses. Instead, the researchers categorized responses in the “Initial Framework” template that comprised various themes, including the awareness milestone, the perception milestone, acceptance, and the assistant axis. Other themes that informed the data analysis process included physicians’ perceptions of acting as family practitioners and working with the nursing staff and patients. Examining Methods and Designs Discussion
Finally, Zimmerman et al. (2020) conducted various statistical analyses consistent with the study design. Firstly, the researchers used Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 23 (IBM, Chicago, IL, USA) to statistically analyze data. They presented categorical variables as counts (percentages) and continuous variables by medians and interquartile ranges. Further, researchers used Chi-squared (x²) statistics to calculate dependence among categorical variables. They established a statistical significance at p≤0.05. Regarding qualitative data analysis strategies, Zimmerman et al. (2020) used themes and memos to document researchers’ thoughts, feelings, and reflections and to record analytical decision-making. The themes that informed qualitative data collection include understanding the workplace culture, students’ modeling local behavior, enhancing awareness and consolidating knowledge for good practice, adjusting to the reality of practice, and availing and accessing additional hand hygiene resources.
The Reliability and Validity Issues of Each Methodology and Design
Research reliability and validity entail the magnitude of the effect of the studied interventions and the consideration of whether the research findings emanated from sound scientific methods (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2019). In a quantitative study, reliability and validity issues include the strength of association between variables, measures of clinical significance, precision in measuring effectiveness, and the presence or absence of biases. Cheng et al. (2018) ensured the study’s reliability and validity by randomly assigning participants to the experimental and control group and adopting sound statistical analysis instruments, including pre-tests and t-tests. Examining Methods and Designs Discussion
For qualitative studies, reliability and validity issues include comprehensive documentation of researchers’ actions, adequacy of the databases, transferability of research findings, dependability, and the consistency of findings across time (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2019). Gilad et al. (2020) ensured the validity and reliability of the study by basing research methods on the grounded theory approach, conducting interviews in quiet settings, documenting interview transcripts, and using themes and categories to inform data collection, analysis, and presentation.
Like qualitative and quantitative research methods, reliable and valid mixed-method studies should demonstrate the accuracy and consistency of measures, the dependability and transferability of research findings, and the accuracy of the results. Zimmerman et al. (2020) used an anonymous paper-based questionnaire, semi-structured interviews, and up-to-date statistical analyses using SPSS Version 23. Also, researchers used five themes to inform data collection and presentation. The study’s findings contained measures of statistical significance (p values) to evaluate relationships between categorical variables. These strategies contributed to the study’s validity and reliability.
Summary
Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method studies have different characteristics, including statistical analysis instruments and data collection methodologies. As evident in the three reviewed articles, quantitative studies are often descriptive and entail quantifiable data. On the other hand, qualitative research methods focus on describing phenomena and answering the why questions using non-quantifiable data, including attitudes, perceptions, and views. Finally, mixed-methods research studies capitalize on the strengths of quantitative and qualitative research paradigms by adopting quantitative and qualitative research elements, including data collection and analysis tools. The effectiveness of each research method depends on the research questions, researchers’ preferences, and research objectives. Examining Methods and Designs Discussion
References
Busetto, L., Wick, W., & Gumbinger, C. (2020). How to use and assess qualitative research methods. Neurological Research and Practice, 2(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-020-00059-z
Cheng, J.-F., Huang, X.-Y., Lin, M.-C., Wang, Y.-H., & Yeh, T.-P. (2018). A mental health home visit service partnership intervention on improving patients’ satisfaction. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 32(4), 610–616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2018.03.010
Gilad, L., Haviv, Y. S., Cohen-Glickman, I., Chinitz, D., & Cohen, M. J. (2020). Chronic drug treatment among hemodialysis patients: A qualitative study of patients, nursing and medical staff attitudes and approaches. BMC Nephrology, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12882-020-01900-y
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2019). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Wolters Kluwer Health.
Scholtz, S. E., de Klerk, W., & de Beer, L. T. (2020). The use of research methods in psychological research: A systematized review. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2020.00001
ORDER HERE NOW
Wasti, S. P., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Sathian, B., & Banerjee, I. (2022). The growing importance of mixed-methods research in health. Nepal Journal of Epidemiology, 12(1), 1175–1178. NCBI. https://doi.org/10.3126/nje.v12i1.43633
Zimmerman, P.-A. P., Sladdin, I., Shaban, R. Z., Gilbert, J., & Brown, L. (2020). Factors influencing hand hygiene practice of nursing students: A descriptive, mixed-methods study. Nurse Education in Practice, 44, 102746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2020.102746 Examining Methods and Designs Discussion
