CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 21Health Policy Implementation ScienceMethodologies in Health Research and PracticeQualitative Research Methods and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mixed-methods research in nephrology

Open access
Bailey, Pippa K., Hole, Barnaby D., Plumb, Lucy A., Caskey, Fergus J.·2022·Kidney International
DOI 10.1016/j.kint.2022.01.027
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Mixed-methods research involves the mixing of at least 1 qualitative and 1 quantitative method in the same research project or set of related projects. Combined use of qualitative and quantitative research methods in nephrology has increased over the last 10 years. In this review, we aim to advance the understanding of mixed-methods research within the kidney community. Qualitative and quantitative techniques provide different but noncompeting representations of what exists in the world; findings from qualitative research do not generalize to a large population, whereas those from quantitative research may not apply to individuals within the diverse and heterogeneous larger population. Mixed-methods research combines these complementary representations, allowing the strengths of each method to be combined and the strengths of 1 method to address the limitations of the other. Mixed-methods approaches can be used to: (i) gain a more complete understanding of a research problem, (ii) explain initial results from one method with results from another, (iii) generate instruments, for example, survey tools and interventions, (iv) evaluate services, and (v) optimize clinical trial design and delivery. There are 3 core mixed-methods designs: explanatory sequential, exploratory sequential, and convergent parallel, which can be combined. We discuss each design in turn before discussing analysis and integration of findings from the different methods. We provide case studies that illustra…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.kint.2022.01.027

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 43

  1. Bristowe, 2015, Qualitative research methods in renal medicine: an introduction, Nephrol Dial Transplant, 30, 1424, 10.1093/ndt/gfu410 · DOI
  2. Tong, 2014, Qualitative research in CKD: an overview of methods and applications, Am J Kidney Dis, 64, 338, 10.1053/j.ajkd.2014.02.026 · DOI
  3. Tong, 2016, Qualitative research in transplantation: ensuring relevance and rigor, Transplantation, 100, 710, 10.1097/TP.0000000000001117 · DOI
  4. Tong, 2013, Qualitative research in organ transplantation: recent contributions to clinical care and policy, Am J Transplant, 13, 1390, 10.1111/ajt.12239 · DOI
  5. Barbour, 1999, The case for combining qualitative and quantitative approaches in health services research, J Health Serv Res Policy, 4, 39, 10.1177/135581969900400110 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Cervantes, 2021, Patient-reported outcomes and experiences in the transition of undocumented patients from emergency to scheduled hemodialysis, Kidney Int, 99, 198, 10.1016/j.kint.2020.07.024 · DOI
  7. Sandelowski, 1996, Focus on qualitative methods: using qualitative methods in intervention studies, Res Nurs Health, 19, 359, 10.1002/(SICI)1098-240X(199608)19:4<359::AID-NUR9>3.0.CO;2-H · DOI · Paper page
  8. Morse, 1991, Approaches to qualitative quantitative methodological triangulation, Nurs Res, 40, 120, 10.1097/00006199-199103000-00014 · DOI
  9. Davison, 2014, Knowledge and attitudes of Canadian First Nations people toward organ donation and transplantation: a quantitative and qualitative analysis, Am J Kidney Dis, 64, 781, 10.1053/j.ajkd.2014.06.029 · DOI
  10. Udayaraj, 2012, Social deprivation, ethnicity, and uptake of living kidney donor transplantation in the United Kingdom, Transplantation, 93, 610, 10.1097/TP.0b013e318245593f · DOI
  11. Bailey, 2016, Socioeconomic deprivation and barriers to live-donor kidney transplantation: a qualitative study of deceased-donor renal transplant recipients, BMJ Open, 6, 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010605 · DOI
  12. Bailey, 2020, Mediators of socioeconomic inequity in living-donor kidney transplantation: results from a UK multicenter case-control study, Transplant Direct, 6, e540, 10.1097/TXD.0000000000000986 · DOI
  13. Bailey, 2017, A multicenter cohort study of potential living kidney donors provides predictors of living kidney donation and non-donation, Kidney Int, 92, 1249, 10.1016/j.kint.2017.04.020 · DOI
  14. Rivara, 2021, Development and content validity of a patient-reported experience measure for home dialysis, Clin J Am Soc Nephrol, 16, 588, 10.2215/CJN.15570920 · DOI
  15. Bagasha, 2020, Health-related quality of life, palliative care needs and 12-month survival among patients with end stage renal disease in Uganda: protocol for a mixed methods longitudinal study, BMC Nephrol, 21, 531, 10.1186/s12882-020-02197-7 · DOI
  16. Ryan, 2003, Using discrete choice experiments to value health care programmes: current practice and future research reflections, Appl Health Econ Health Policy, 2, 55
  17. Davison, 2010, Patient and health professional preferences for organ allocation and procurement, end-of-life care and organization of care for patients with chronic kidney disease using a discrete choice experiment, Nephrol Dial Transplant, 25, 2334, 10.1093/ndt/gfq072 · DOI
  18. Coast, 2012, Using qualitative methods for attribute development for discrete choice experiments: issues and recommendations, Health Econ, 21, 730, 10.1002/hec.1739 · DOI
  19. Morton, 2012, Factors influencing patient choice of dialysis versus conservative care to treat end-stage kidney disease, CMAJ, 184, E277, 10.1503/cmaj.111355 · DOI
  20. Morton, 2010, The views of patients and carers in treatment decision making for chronic kidney disease: systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies, BMJ, 340, c112, 10.1136/bmj.c112 · DOI
  21. Morton, 2010, Patient views about treatment of stage 5 CKD: a qualitative analysis of semistructured interviews, Am J Kidney Dis, 55, 431, 10.1053/j.ajkd.2009.11.011 · DOI
  22. Morton, 2011, Characteristics of dialysis important to patients and family caregivers: a mixed methods approach, Nephrol Dial Transplant, 26, 4038, 10.1093/ndt/gfr177 · DOI
  23. Bailey, 2021, Development of an intervention to improve access to living-donor kidney transplantation (the ASK study), PLoS One, 16, 10.1371/journal.pone.0253667 · DOI
  24. Donovan, 2016, Optimising recruitment and informed consent in randomised controlled trials: the development and implementation of the Quintet Recruitment Intervention (QRI), Trials, 17, 283, 10.1186/s13063-016-1391-4 · DOI
  25. Rooshenas, 2019, Intensive triangulation of qualitative research and quantitative data to improve recruitment to randomized trials: the QuinteT approach, Qual Health Res, 29, 672, 10.1177/1049732319828693 · DOI
  26. Young, 2020, Exercise for people living with frailty and receiving haemodialysis: a mixed-methods randomised controlled feasibility study, BMJ Open, 10, 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041227 · DOI
  27. ISRCTN registry. ISRCTN10989132. ASK: improving access to kidney transplantation. Accessed October 18, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN10989132 · DOI
  28. Donovan, 2002, Quality improvement report: improving design and conduct of randomised trials by embedding them in qualitative research: ProtecT (prostate testing for cancer and treatment) study. Commentary: presenting unbiased information to patients can be difficult, BMJ, 325, 766, 10.1136/bmj.325.7367.766 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Murphy, 2021, The Prepare for Kidney Care study: prepare for renal dialysis versus responsive management in advanced chronic kidney disease, Nephrol Dial Transplant, 36, 975, 10.1093/ndt/gfaa209 · DOI
  30. Moore, 2015, Process evaluation of complex interventions: medical research council guidance, BMJ, 350, h1258, 10.1136/bmj.h1258 · DOI · Paper page
  31. O’Cathain, 2010, Three techniques for integrating data in mixed methods studies, BMJ, 341, c4587, 10.1136/bmj.c4587 · DOI · Paper page
  32. Greenhalgh, 2016, An open letter to The BMJ editors on qualitative research, BMJ, 352, i563, 10.1136/bmj.i563 · DOI
  33. Hollin, 2020, Reporting formative qualitative research to support the development of quantitative preference study protocols and corresponding survey instruments: guidelines for authors and reviewers, Patient, 13, 121, 10.1007/s40271-019-00401-x · DOI
  34. O’Cathain, 2008, The quality of mixed methods studies in health services research, J Health Serv Res Policy, 13, 92, 10.1258/jhsrp.2007.007074 · DOI
  35. Pearson, 2015, A mixed-methods approach to systematic reviews, Int J Evid Based Healthc, 13, 121, 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000052 · DOI
  36. Sandelowski, 2006, Defining and designing mixed research synthesis studies, Res Sch, 13, 29
  37. Hoang, 2018, Informal caregivers’ experiences of caring for people receiving dialysis: a mixed-methods systematic review, J Ren Care, 44, 82
  38. Tong, 2007, Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups, Int J Qual Health Care, 19, 349, 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042 · DOI · Paper page
  39. Schulz, 2010, CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials, BMJ, 340, c332, 10.1136/bmj.c332 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Leech, 2010, Guidelines for conducting and reporting mixed research in the field of counseling and beyond, J Couns Dev, 88, 61
  41. Wong, 2016, RAMESES II reporting standards for realist evaluations, BMC Med, 14, 96, 10.1186/s12916-016-0643-1 · DOI · Paper page
  42. Higginson, 2013, Evaluating complex interventions in end of life care: the MORECare statement on good practice generated by a synthesis of transparent expert consultations and systematic reviews, BMC Med, 24, 111, 10.1186/1741-7015-11-111 · DOI
  43. Pinnock, 2017, Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies (StaRI) statement, BMJ, 356, i6795, 10.1136/bmj.i6795 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 21

Metadata

Authors
Bailey, P. K., Hole, B. D., Plumb, L. A., & Caskey, F. J.
Affiliations
University of Bristol (GB)
Corresponding author
Bailey, Pippa K.
ORCID
Venue
Kidney International
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-05
Volume
101
Issue
5
Pages
895-905
ISSN
0085-2538 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.kint.2022.01.027
OpenAlex
W4214680452
Cited by
21
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
FWCI
0.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Kidney International (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Wellcome Trust
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Methodologies in Health Research and Practice
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
Keywords
mixed methods, nephrology research, qualitative and quantitative methods, explanatory sequential design, exploratory sequential design, evidence synthesis, kidney research
MeSH terms
Humans, Nephrology, Research Design, Qualitative Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mixed-methods research in nephrology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.kint.2022.01.027
The paper
Bailey, P. K., Hole, B. D., Plumb, L. A., & Caskey, F. J. (2022). Mixed-methods research in nephrology. Kidney International. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kint.2022.01.027