coursework-banner

DQ: The theoretical foundations of qualitative and quantitative methods are very different, but many researchers believe both methods should be used in the research study to increase validity and reliability

DQ The theoretical foundations of qualitative and quantitative methods are very different, but many researchers believe both methods should be used in the research study to increase validity and reliability

NRS 433 Topic 5 DQ 1

Replies to Mireille Ulysse

The application of quantitative and qualitative research methods is different, but when the two are used together in research, they increase reliability and availability from the roles played. The quantitative designs used in research are correlational, descriptive, experimental, and quasi. Qualitative research design gives exploratory aspects of the research. Through them, the researcher gains the underlying reasons for opinions, motivations, and reasons concerning the research problem, thus providing the insights to develop ideas and hypotheses (Rahman, 2020). With the mixed research method, the two approaches are integrated within one research activity for certain benefits but are also accompanied by disadvantages.

The main advantage of using mixed methods is reducing errors and understanding the contradictions from the different types of data presented. Using the mixture methods makes the challenges of one of the research methods overcome with the other method (Ivankova & Wingo, 2018). Besides, the mixture of two research methods gives a range of multidisciplinary teams to give the gives based on qualitative and quantitative research data. Hence, more insight and professionalism when dealing with the collected data. The last advantage of using the two methods combined is that it gives more comprehensive and detailed information than when the research methodology is used.

On the other hand, mixed methods face complex planning and research problems. Using both methods need enough knowledge and skills to be appropriately implemented since researchers must be open to different ways that are not within their area of specialization (Molina-Azorin et al., 2018). The mixed methods are labor-intensive as more labor and resources are required to carry out research with the mixed methods than using a single method for the study.

DQ The theoretical foundations of qualitative and quantitative methods are very different, but many researchers believe both methods should be used in the research study to increase validity and reliability

H Mireille,

Mixed method research “draws on potential strengths of both qualitative and quantitative methods allowing researchers to explore diverse perspectives and uncover relationships that exist between the intricate layers of our multifaceted research questions” (Shorten, 2017). The reason this is so important because our patient safety highly depends on the information we receive from the studies. Researchers retrieve this information from data integration. Data integration “enables researchers to seek a more panoramic view of their research landscape, viewing phenomena from different viewpoints and through diverse research lenses” (Shorten, 2017). The three types of mixed methods of study include exploratory sequential, parallel, and nested. An example in nursing research in an exploratory sequential is studying work related symptoms of stress (quan) while measuring the number of nurses by survey (qual) who report symptoms. This mixed study helps the researcher understand two things, how many nurses report stress and the common symptom they experience from that stress. Leadership can use this information to determine how stressful their work environments are and attempt to resolve the situation with either added staff or stress related intervention such as massages or offering a free gym and wellness groups to employees. Stakeholders are going to want justification for funding, and research provides validity to the problem. The same example, a parallel study is completed concurrently, research will measure symptoms of stress (quan) and how many nurses call out of work (qual) during the time it is reported. Using the same example with nested research, the study could start with how many nurses called off (qual) and if stress related symptoms were reported in those call offs (quan). Mixed method research gives us a better understanding of the same situation from different views of understanding. Thank you, Jana

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: DQ: The theoretical foundations of qualitative and quantitative methods are very different, but many researchers believe both methods should be used in the research study to increase validity and reliability

  • Replies to Mireille Ulysse

A mixed-method increases the researcher’s knowledge and creates a more in-depth understanding of the subject to be studied (Schoonenboom & Johnson, 2017). Combining the subjective and objective data creates a holistic picture of the problem or issue to be researched. There is much more to data gathering than numbers when the subjects are participants. People make a complex dimension to a study because other factors influence the outcome of a survey based on how the subject feels (CDC. 2022). Though each subject will react differently in a clinical study because they are different people with different experiences, the overall sense of side effects, adverse effects, and reactions may remain consistent between participants. Therefore, adding individually to a study brings it full circle to cause and effect and the why of a study (Regnault et al., 2018). Why do patients not adhere to medications? How does the patient feel? Why are they unmotivated to change? These can better help the reasons behind the obstacles our patients face and allow us to be better advocates to our patients if we can better understand them. It closes the communication gap to ask the right questions if we can understand patients’ mental and physical aspects.

DQ The theoretical foundations of qualitative and quantitative methods are very different, but many researchers believe both methods should be used in the research study to increase validity and reliability

References

 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC]. (2022). Collecting and Analyzing Qualitative Data. Cdc.gov. https://www.cdc.gov/eis/field-epi-manual/chapters/Qualitative-Data.html

 

Regnault, A., Willgoss, T., & Barbic, S. (2018). Towards the use of mixed methods inquiry as best practice in health outcomes research. Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-018-0043-8

 

Schoonenboom, J., & Johnson, R. B. (2017). How to Construct a Mixed Methods Research Design. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift Für Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie, 69(S2), 107–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-017-0454-1

DQ: The theoretical foundations of qualitative and quantitative methods are very different, but many researchers believe both methods should be used in the research study to increase validity and reliability

Tamara Houston

Posted Date

May 4, 2022, 6:38 PM(edited)

Replies to Mireille Ulysse

When utilizing both qualitative and quantitative research methods, to me it seems as though using mixed methods has more advantages than disadvantages. It basically allows the researcher to utilize a holistic approach to research by allowing things to be studied from different aspects to get the whole picture. Depending on the study, using a mixed method allows the researcher to understand perception, behaviors, or experiences of research through the qualitative method and also allows for measurement of data through experiment, correlation, or data collection by way of the quantitative method. Combining the two approaches can produce more scientifically sound and transferable results by synergistically integrating qualitative stakeholder engagement with quantitative outcomes to inform action/intervention planning, implementation, evaluation, and monitoring (Ivankova & Wingo, 2018). This is the basis and blueprint for evidence-based nursing practice you would think. There are disadvantages to using this mixed method as well. Inadequate justification for using mixed-methods and inadequate data integration compromises the rigor of mixed-methods studies, and data integration remains a challenge for nurse researchers (Younas et al., 2019). Due to such an abundance of information to try and mold together, researchers may find it challenging to analyze such data and also present it in an unorganized manner which ultimately can diminish the quality of the research.

The evidence-based practice at my workplace is an application used for hourly rounding. Such activities help the nurses in my workplace to anticipate and address the needs of the patients in time hence leading to the better patient outcome theoretical foundations of qualitative and quantitative methods and research-based (or evidence-based) practice. According to Borbasi and Jackson (2014), the final evidence-based practice regularly used in the workplace is the rule of hand washing for both the patient and the nurse. My workplace uses this evidence-based practice as a way of eradicating germs. Evidence-based practice at my workplace has reduced the patient fall rate drastically as well as giving nurses the chance to assess the basic needs of a patient.

 

To make spirituality and self-care a practice for your patients as well as yourself, you might endeavor to establish an atmosphere that is supportive of spiritual and self-care activities. For example, you may design a location in your office that is peaceful and relaxing, and that has materials accessible for patients to utilize for self-care. You may also educate patients on the value of spiritual and self-care activities, and give them with information about how to incorporate these practices into their life.

 

The Christian worldview encourages the practice of spirituality and self-care. Christians believe that people are formed in the image of God, and that we are made to be in connection with God. Christians also believe that we need God’s mercy in order to be healed and restored. As such, the Christian worldview supports the concept that spirituality and self-care are crucial activities that may enable us to discover healing and completeness (Dennison & Pugh, 2017).

References

Borbasi, S., & Jackson, D. (2014). Navigating the maze of nursing research. Chatswood, N.S.W: Elsevier Australia theoretical foundations of qualitative and quantitative methods and research-based (or evidence-based) practice

 

Dennison, L., & Pugh, L. C. (2017). Christian nursing: A comprehensive approach (4th ed.). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.

 

Incorporating qualitative and quantitative research methods provides a comprehensive understanding of the research topic. There are various advantages and disadvantages of implementing the mixed methods approach. The advantage includes a better comprehension of the area under research. The quantitative approach provides statistical significance or correlation of the variables under investigation. On the other hand, the qualitative method offers the opportunity to explore contextual factors such as preferences and experiences of the study participant on the research topic.

The study by  Yeheskel & Rawal (2019) exemplified this advantage. It used a mixed method analysis to explore factors influencing patient satisfaction, especially among those with limited English proficiency in healthcare access. The other critical advantage is that the mixed method analysis improves the validity and reliability of the findings. The approach is usually anchored on triangulation, which compares various methods that strengthen the credibility and dependability of the results by cross-validating the findings.

The study by Hafez Griauzde et al. (2020) used a mixed-method approach anchored on quantitative surveys, qualitative interviews, and observations to explore a low-carbohydrate diabetes prevention program. The approach enables the integration of data from various aspects of diabetes prevention protocol, leading to improved validity and reliability of their findings. Additionally, the mixed method approach guides generalizing research findings to a broader population. Therefore, it is essential to encourage healthcare professionals to utilize a mixed-method approach in nursing research. It leads to a better understanding of the topic under study, improves validity and reliability, and generalizability to the broader population.

The mixed method approach usually has various disadvantages that can lead to challenges in data analysis. Data integration is a significant disadvantage of the approach. Nurses may face challenges integrating different data formats and structures from qualitative and quantitative methods. The study by Hong et al. (2020) provides a case study of 30 mixed-method studies and indicates the challenges faced in data integration. The other critical disadvantage of the mixed method is that it is time-consuming and resource-intensive. Each approach requires different data collection techniques and analysis methods, leading to additional time and resources for training. The study by  Johnson et al. (2018) indicates that utilizing a mixed-method approach is resource-intensive and consumes a lot of time, hence the need to assess its feasibility. Additionally, the method may have contradictory results. Qualitative results may not always align with quantitative outcomes. Therefore,  the researchers must be careful to reconcile the differences to ensure the validity and reliability of their findings.

References

Yeheskel, A., & Rawal, S. (2019). Exploring the “Patient Experience” of Individuals with  Limited English Proficiency: A Scoping Review. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health21(4), 853–878. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-018-0816-4

Hafez Griauzde, D., Saslow, L., Patterson, K., Ansari, T., Liestenfeltz, B., Tisack, A., Bihn,   P., Shopinski, S., & Richardson, C. R. (2020). Mixed methods pilot study of a low-  carbohydrate diabetes prevention program among adults with pre-diabetes in the USA. BMJ Open10(1), e033397. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033397

Hong, Q. N., Rees, R., Sutcliffe, K., & Thomas, J. (2020). Variations of mixed methods  review approach A case study. Research Synthesis Methods11(6).       https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1437