The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Quality of Mixed Methods Studies in Health Services Research
Abstract
Objectives: To assess the quality of mixed methods studies in health services research (HSR). Methods: We identified 118 mixed methods studies funded by the Department of Health in England between 1994 and 2004, and obtained proposals and/or final reports for 75. We applied a set of quality questions to both the proposal and report of each study, addressing the success of the study, the mixed methods design, the individual qualitative and quantitative components, the integration between methods and the inferences drawn from completed studies. Results: Most studies were completed successfully. Researchers mainly ignored the mixed methods design and described only the separate components of a study. There was a lack of justification for, and transparency of, the mixed methods design in both proposals and reports, and this had implications for making judgements about the quality of individual components in the context of the design used. There was also a lack of transparency of the individual methods in terms of clear exposition of data collection and analysis, and this was more a problem for the qualitative than the quantitative component: 42% (19/45) versus 18% (8/45) of proposals (p 5 0.011). Judgements about integration could rarely be made due to the absence of an attempt at integration of data and findings from different components within a study. Conclusions: The HSR community could improve mixed methods studies by giving more consideration to describing and justifying the design, being transparent about the qualitative component, and attempting to integrate data and findings from the individual components.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Qualitative research in health care: Analysing qualitative data
Pope, C. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7227.114 · Cited by 8,131
Qualitative research methods in health technology assessment: a review of the literature.
Murphy, Dingwall, Greatbatch, Parker, & Watson (1998) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta2160 · Cited by 1,107
Mixed-method evaluation: Developing quality criteria through concept mapping
Caracelli, V. J., & Riggin, L. J. C. (1994) · Evaluation Practice · doi:10.1016/0886-1633(94)90005-1 · Cited by 52
Research works printed but not linked: 28
- 10.1186/1472-6963-7-85 · DOI · Paper page
- Bryman A, 1992, Mixing Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Research., 57
- 10.1370/afm.104 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/ev.1070 · DOI
- Teddlie C, 2003, Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioural Research., 3
- 10.1023/B:QUQU.0000043126.25329.85 · DOI
- Creswell JW, 2007, Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research.
- Brannen J, 1992, Qualitative and Quantitative Research., 3
- Creswell JW, 2003, Research Design. Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches.
- 10.1258/1355819054308576 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/1558689806299094 · DOI · Paper page
- Brewer J, 1989, Multimethod Research.
- Tashakkori A, 2003, Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioural Research.
- Tashakkori A, 1998, Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches.
- Gorard S, 2004, Combining Methods in Educational and Social Research.
- Brannen J, 1992, Mixing Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Research.
- 10.4324/9780203410028 · DOI · Paper page
- Greene JC, 1997, Advances in Mixed-method Evaluation: The Challenges and Benefits of Integrating Diverse Paradigms.
- 10.4135/9781412984775 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.4324/9780203413081_chapter_5 · DOI
- Miller S, 2003, Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioural Research., 423
- 10.1186/1471-2288-4-22 · DOI · Paper page
- Silverman D, 2000, Doing Qualitative Research. A Practical Handbook.
- 10.1177/109019819201900101 · DOI · Paper page
- Chen H, 1997, Advances in Mixed-method Evaluation: The Challenges and Benefits of Integrating Diverse Paradigms., 61
- 10.1002/1098-240X(200006)23:3<246::AID-NUR9>3.0.CO;2-H · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1186/1471-2288-4-25 · DOI · Paper page
- Hammersley M, 1992, What's Wrong with Ethnography?
Cited by
Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance
Moore, G. F., Audrey, S., Barker, M., Bond, L., Bonell, C., Hardeman, W., Moore, L., O'Cathain, A., Tinati, T., Wight, D., et al. (2015) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.h1258 · Cited by 6,204
Self-citationThe COMET Handbook: version 1.0
Williamson, P. R., Altman, D. G., Bagley, H., Barnes, K. L., Blazeby, J. M., Brookes, S. T., Clarke, M., Gargon, E., Gorst, S., Harman, N., et al. (2017) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1978-4 · Cited by 2,011
Guetterman, T. C., Fetters, M. D., & Creswell, J. W. (2015) · The Annals of Family Medicine · doi:10.1370/afm.1865 · Cited by 1,740
Pace, R., Pluye, P., Bartlett, G., Macaulay, A. C., Salsberg, J., Jagosh, J., & Seller, R. (2012) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.07.002 · Cited by 1,331
Pluye, P., Gagnon, M.-P., Griffiths, F., & Johnson-Lafleur, J. (2009) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.01.009 · Cited by 1,119
Metadata
- Authors
- O'cathain, A., Murphy, E., & Nicholl, J.
- Venue
- Journal of Health Services Research & Policy
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-04
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 92-98
- ISSN
- 1355-8196 (ISSN-L)
- 1758-1060
- OpenAlex
- W2152129467
- Cited by
- 1,916
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 20.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
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: The Quality of Mixed Methods Studies in Health Services Research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1258/jhsrp.2007.007074
- The paper
- O'cathain, A., Murphy, E., & Nicholl, J. (2008). The Quality of Mixed Methods Studies in Health Services Research. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy. https://doi.org/10.1258/jhsrp.2007.007074
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
