Combining the power of stories and the power of numbers: mixed methods research and mixed studies reviews.

By Pierre Pluye, Quan Nha Hong. Annual Review of Public Health, 2014

1,245 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/01c381181f988675b83a307c23cc39a11a1452a7

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

A systematic review of graduate student peer mentorship in academia (2019, methodology): “We used thematic ‘convergent’ analysis techniques to identify common and divergent themes across studies (Pluye & Hong, 2014, p. 33).”
"Same same or different?" A review of reviews of person-centered and patient-centered care. (2019, methodology): “The literature review was performed according to the seven stages described by Pluye and Hong [30]: (i) formulating the review question; (ii) defining the eligibility criteria; (iii) applying the search strategy; (iv) identifying relevant studies; (v) selecting relevant studies; (vi) appraising qual”
Convergent and sequential synthesis designs: implications for conducting and reporting systematic reviews of qualitative and quantitative evidence (2017, methodology): “SMSR follows the typical stages of systematic review, with the particularity of including evidence from qualitative, quantitative, and/or mixed method studies [7, 10].”
Stressing the relevance of resilience: a systematic review of resilience across the domains of sport and work (2017, methodology): “Using the seven-stage model provided by Pluye and Hong (2014) for analysing mixed study reviews, this review can be classified as a convergent, mixed-methods design in”
Ultra‐processed foods and the nutrition transition: Global, regional and national trends, food systems transformations and political economy drivers (2020, methodology): “tative and qualitative data sources required to address the aim, we adopted a mixed methods synthesis review method.(102,103) This combined (a) a quantitative analysis of worldwide trends and patterns in the apparent consumption of UPFs, including ‘risk ingredients’ linked”
Improving the usefulness of a tool for appraising the quality of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies, the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) (2018, background): “Systematic reviews combining qualitative, quantitative, and/or mixed methods studies are more and more popular because of their potential for addressing complex evaluation questions that matter in clinical practice.(1,2) Indeed, including different types of studies in a review can provide a richer u”
The relationships between school climate and adolescent mental health and wellbeing: A systematic literature review (2018, unknown): “…challenge is worth the e ﬀ ort, since comparing the ﬁ ndings of di ﬀ erent kinds of studies shows how di ﬀ erent research designs can learn from one another, and which research approaches and topics might usefully be developed in future ” (Harden et al., 2001, p. 4; see also Pluye & Hong, 2014).”
Methodological guidance for the conduct of mixed methods systematic reviews (2020, unknown): “4 Through the development of well-structured MMSRs, the objective numerical data inherent in the logical positivist paradigm combines with the equally important subjective opinions and perspectives presented in the constructivist paradigm.”