IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v26y2017i19-20p2878-2890.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mixed‐methods research in nursing – a critical review

Author

Listed:
  • Valentina Bressan
  • Annamaria Bagnasco
  • Giuseppe Aleo
  • Fiona Timmins
  • Michela Barisone
  • Monica Bianchi
  • Ramona Pellegrini
  • Loredana Sasso

Abstract

Aims and objectives To review the use of mixed‐methods research in nursing with a particular focus on the extent to which current practice informs nurse researchers. It also aimed to highlight gaps in current knowledge, understanding and reporting of this type of research. Background Mixed‐methods research is becoming increasingly popular among nurses and healthcare professionals. Emergent findings from this type of research are very useful for nurses in practice. The combination of both quantitative and qualitative methods provides a scientific base for practice but also richness from the qualitative enquiry. However, at the same time mixed‐methods research is underdeveloped. Methods This study identified mixed‐methods research papers and critically evaluated their usefulness for research practice. To support the analysis, we performed a two‐stage search using CINAHL to find papers with titles that included the key term ‘mixed method’. Conclusion An analysis of studies that used mixed‐methods research revealed some inconsistencies in application and reporting. Attempts to use two distinct research methods in these studies often meant that one or both aspects had limitations. Overall methods were applied in a less rigorous way. This has implications for providing somewhat limited direction for novice researchers. There is also potential for application of evidence in healthcare practice that limited validity. Relevance to clinical practice This study highlights current gaps in knowledge, understanding and reporting of mixed‐methods research. While these methods are useful to gain insight into clinical problems nurses lack guidance with this type of research. This study revealed that the guidance provided by current mixed‐methods research is inconsistent and incomplete and this compounds the lack of available direction. There is an urgent need to develop robust guidelines for using mixed‐methods research so that findings may be critically implemented in practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Valentina Bressan & Annamaria Bagnasco & Giuseppe Aleo & Fiona Timmins & Michela Barisone & Monica Bianchi & Ramona Pellegrini & Loredana Sasso, 2017. "Mixed‐methods research in nursing – a critical review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(19-20), pages 2878-2890, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:26:y:2017:i:19-20:p:2878-2890
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13631
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13631
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.13631?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Judy Mannix & Lesley Wilkes & John Daly, 2015. "‘Good ethics and moral standing’: a qualitative study of aesthetic leadership in clinical nursing practice," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(11-12), pages 1603-1610, June.
    2. Peter K O'Shaughnessy & Colin Ireland & Lemuel Pelentsov & Laws A Thomas & Adrian J Esterman, 2013. "Impaired sexual function and prostate cancer: a mixed method investigation into the experiences of men and their partners," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(23-24), pages 3492-3502, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tetsuya Tanioka & Rozzano C. Locsin & Feni Betriana & Yoshihiro Kai & Kyoko Osaka & Elizabeth Baua & Savina Schoenhofer, 2021. "Intentional Observational Clinical Research Design: Innovative Design for Complex Clinical Research Using Advanced Technology," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-15, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David Stanley & Karen Stanley, 2018. "Clinical leadership and nursing explored: A literature search," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(9-10), pages 1730-1743, May.
    2. Catharina Frid Annerstedt & Stinne Glasdam, 2019. "Nurses' attitudes towards support for and communication about sexual health—A qualitative study from the perspectives of oncological nurses," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(19-20), pages 3556-3566, October.
    3. Trude Furunes & Anita Kaltveit & Kristin Akerjordet, 2018. "Health‐promoting leadership: A qualitative study from experienced nurses’ perspective," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(23-24), pages 4290-4301, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:26:y:2017:i:19-20:p:2878-2890. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.