The Quality of Mixed Methods Studies in Health Services Research

By Alicia O'Cathain, E. Murphy, J. Nicholl. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 2008

1,509 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Sociology and Political Science, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4cbcacd3f26763388d1b9bb55ab80d20fe47390f

How researchers see this paper

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

In General Health Professions

1. Pierre Pluye
2. Mike Clarke
3. Marie-Pierre Gagnon
4. Douglas G. Altman
5. Frances Griffiths
6. Janique Johnson‐Lafleur
7. Mieke Heyvaert
8. Patrick Onghena

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Mike Clarke
2. Douglas G. Altman
3. Jane M. Blazeby
4. Elizabeth Gargon
5. U. Östlund
6. L. Kidd
7. Janique Johnson‐Lafleur
8. N. Rowa-Dewar

In Statistics and Probability

1. Mike Clarke
2. Pierre Pluye
3. Douglas G. Altman
4. C. Prinsen
5. Jane M. Blazeby
6. S. Brookes
7. Janique Johnson‐Lafleur
8. Frances Griffiths

Citations in the corpus

• A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in Mixed Studies Reviews. (2009, methodology): “There is no consensus on criteria for appraising the methodological quality of mixed methods research (O’Cathain et al., 2008).”
• Combining qualitative and quantitative research within mixed method research designs: A methodological review (2011, methodology): “Discussion As the need for, and use of, mixed methods research continues to grow, the issue of quality within mixed methods studies is becoming increasingly important (O’Cathain et al., 2008, 2007).”
• Using mixed methods in health research (2013, methodology): “Whatever the reasons for mixing methods, it is important that authors present these explicitly as it allows us to assess if a mixed methods study design is appropriate for answering the research question.(3,13)”
• Critical Appraisal of Mixed Methods Studies (2013, methodology): “…& McNally, 2004; Bryman et al., 2008; Caracelli & Riggin, 1994; Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007; Dellinger & Leech, 2007; Dybå et al., 2007; Greene, 2007; O’Cathain et al., 2008; Onwuegbuzie & Johnson, 2006; Pluye et al., 2005; Pluye et al., 2009a; Sale & Brazil, 2004; Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2009).”
• The COMET Handbook: version 1.0 (2017, methodology): “Where the qualitative research is combined with other elements of the COS development process, authors may find it helpful to consult articles on writing up mixed-methods research [155].”