Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: A review of possible methods

By M. Dixon-Woods, Shona Agarwal, David R. Jones, B. Young, A. Sutton. 2005

1,229 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Sociology and Political Science, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bb73a41b9747ee3be0bc08521af4b833d543d698

How researchers see this paper

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

1. I. Bormann
2. Silvana Pohle
3. Annika Kallfaß
4. Sebastian Niedlich

Citations in the corpus

• A comprehensive view of trust in education: Conclusions from a systematic literature review (2020, methodology): “While the thematic analysis was used to extract and summarise relevant information from the literature, the interpretive analysis served to synthesise identified concepts into ‘a higher-order theoretical structure’ (Dixon-Woods et al., 2005, 47).”
• Methodological guidance for the conduct of mixed methods systematic reviews (2020, neutral): “Decision-makers who use systematic reviews have argued for a more complete synthesis of the evidence than that currently offered by single method reviews.(1) Mixed methods systematic reviews (MMSRs) have become an important development in evidence-based health care as they maximize the ability of re”