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
Order this paper