IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hin/jnlnrp/798213.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mixing a Grounded Theory Approach with a Randomized Controlled Trial Related to Intimate Partner Violence: What Challenges Arise for Mixed Methods Research?

Author

Listed:
  • Cristina Catallo
  • Susan M. Jack
  • Donna Ciliska
  • Harriet L. MacMillan

Abstract

Little is known about how to systematically integrate complex qualitative studies within the context of randomized controlled trials. A two-phase sequential explanatory mixed methods study was conducted in Canada to understand how women decide to disclose intimate partner violence in emergency department settings. Mixing a RCT (with a subanalysis of data) with a grounded theory approach required methodological modifications to maintain the overall rigour of this mixed methods study. Modifications were made to the following areas of the grounded theory approach to support the overall integrity of the mixed methods study design: recruitment of participants, maximum variation and negative case sampling, data collection, and analysis methods. Recommendations for future studies include: (1) planning at the outset to incorporate a qualitative approach with a RCT and to determine logical points during the RCT to integrate the qualitative component and (2) consideration for the time needed to carry out a RCT and a grounded theory approach, especially to support recruitment, data collection, and analysis. Data mixing strategies should be considered during early stages of the study, so that appropriate measures can be developed and used in the RCT to support initial coding structures and data analysis needs of the grounded theory phase.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristina Catallo & Susan M. Jack & Donna Ciliska & Harriet L. MacMillan, 2013. "Mixing a Grounded Theory Approach with a Randomized Controlled Trial Related to Intimate Partner Violence: What Challenges Arise for Mixed Methods Research?," Nursing Research and Practice, Hindawi, vol. 2013, pages 1-12, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:hin:jnlnrp:798213
    DOI: 10.1155/2013/798213
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/NRP/2013/798213.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/NRP/2013/798213.xml
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1155/2013/798213?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. Joanna Sale & Lynne Lohfeld & Kevin Brazil, 2002. "Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed-Methods Research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 43-53, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Petra C Gronholm & Oluwadamilola Onagbesan & Poonam Gardner-Sood, 2017. "Care coordinator views and experiences of physical health monitoring in clients with severe mental illness: A qualitative study," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 63(7), pages 580-588, November.
    2. Rosalia Diaz‐Carrion & Macarena López‐Fernández & Pedro M. Romero‐Fernandez, 2020. "Sustainable human resource management and employee engagement: A holistic assessment instrument," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1749-1760, July.
    3. Stephen Buetow, 2014. "How Can a Family Resemblances Approach Help to Typify Qualitative Research? Exploring the Complexity of Simplicity," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(4), pages 21582440145, October.
    4. Gjoko Stamenkov, 2023. "Recommendations for improving research quality: relationships among constructs, verbs in hypotheses, theoretical perspectives, and triangulation," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 2923-2946, June.
    5. Monika Mynarska & Anna Matysiak, 2010. "Women's determination to combine childbearing and paid employment: How can a qualitative approach help us understand quantitative evidence?," Working Papers 26, Institute of Statistics and Demography, Warsaw School of Economics.
    6. Anita Mendiratta & Shveta Singh & Surendra Singh Yadav & Arvind Mahajan, 2023. "Bibliometric and Topic Modeling Analysis of Corporate Social Irresponsibility," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 24(3), pages 319-339, September.
    7. Luigi Doria & Luca Fantacci, 2018. "Evaluating complementary currencies: from the assessment of multiple social qualities to the discovery of a unique monetary sociality," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 1291-1314, May.
    8. Jana Uher, 2019. "Data generation methods across the empirical sciences: differences in the study phenomena’s accessibility and the processes of data encoding," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 221-246, January.
    9. Oliveira, Athila Leandro de & Coelho Junior, Marcondes Geraldo & Barros, Dalmo Arantes & Resende, Alexander Silva de & Sansevero, Jerônimo Boelsums Barreto & Borges, Luis Antônio Coimbra & Basso, Vane, 2020. "Revisiting the concept of “fiscal modules”: implications for restoration and conservation programs in Brazil," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    10. Achim Goerres & Katrin Prinzen, 2012. "Using mixed methods for the analysis of individuals: a review of necessary and sufficient conditions and an application to welfare state attitudes," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 415-450, February.
    11. Yang Liu, 2022. "Paradigmatic Compatibility Matters: A Critical Review of Qualitative-Quantitative Debate in Mixed Methods Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    12. Izhak Berkovich, 2018. "Beyond qualitative/quantitative structuralism: the positivist qualitative research and the paradigmatic disclaimer," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(5), pages 2063-2077, September.
    13. Oumr Adnan Osra, 2017. "Urban transformation and sociocultural changes in King Abdullah Economic City (KAEC) 2005-2020: Key research challenges," Journal of Advances in Humanities and Social Sciences, Dr. Yi-Hsing Hsieh, vol. 3(3), pages 135-151.
    14. Muhammad Chowdhury, 2015. "Coding, sorting and sifting of qualitative data analysis: debates and discussion," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 1135-1143, May.
    15. Luis Javier Cabeza-Ramírez & Fernando J. Fuentes-García & Guzmán A. Muñoz-Fernandez, 2021. "Exploring the Emerging Domain of Research on Video Game Live Streaming in Web of Science: State of the Art, Changes and Trends," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-27, March.
    16. Ali, Mohd Helmi & Suleiman, Norhidayah, 2016. "Sustainable food production: Insights of Malaysian halal small and medium sized enterprises," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 181(PB), pages 303-314.
    17. Stephen Gorard & Yiyi Tan, 2022. "The difficulty of making claims to knowledge in social science," Technium Social Sciences Journal, Technium Science, vol. 28(1), pages 170-202, February.
    18. Nuzhat Haneef, 2013. "Empirical research consolidation: a generic overview and a classification scheme for methods," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 383-410, January.
    19. Alyssa L. Grecu & Andreas Hadjar & Kevin Simoes Loureiro, 2022. "The Role of Teaching Styles in the Development of School Alienation and Behavioral Consequences: A Mixed Methods Study of Luxembourgish Primary Schools," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, June.
    20. Carl Allwood, 2012. "The distinction between qualitative and quantitative research methods is problematic," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1417-1429, August.

    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:hin:jnlnrp:798213. 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: Mohamed Abdelhakeem (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.hindawi.com .

    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.