Criteria for Quantitative and Qualitative Data Integration: Mixed-Methods Research Methodology

Many studies have emphasized the need and importance of a mixed-methods approach for evaluation of clinical information systems. However, those studies had no criteria to guide integration of multiple data sets. Integrating different data sets serves to actualize the paradigm that a mixed-methods approach argues; thus, we require criteria that provide the right direction to integrate quantitative and qualitative data. The first author used a set of criteria organized from a literature search for integration of multiple data sets from mixed-methods research. The purpose of this article was to reorganize the identified criteria. Through critical appraisal of the reasons for designing mixed-methods research, three criteria resulted: validation, complementarity, and discrepancy. In applying the criteria to empirical data of a previous mixed methods study, integration of quantitative and qualitative data was achieved in a systematic manner. It helped us obtain a better organized understanding of the results. The criteria of this article offer the potential to produce insightful analyses of mixed-methods evaluations of health information systems.

[1]  Charles Teddlie,et al.  Mixed Methods Sampling A Typology With Examples , 2016 .

[2]  Maricel Lising,et al.  A Multimethod Approach to Evaluating Critical Care Information Systems , 2005, Computers, informatics, nursing : CIN.

[3]  Valerie J. Caracelli,et al.  Toward a Conceptual Framework for Mixed-Method Evaluation Designs , 1989 .

[4]  Bonnie Kaplan,et al.  Review: Addressing Organizational Issues into the Evaluation of Medical Systems , 1997, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[5]  Seonah Lee.  A Multimethod Approach for Quality Evaluation of Clinical Information Systems , 2011, Computers, informatics, nursing : CIN.

[6]  A. Onwuegbuzie,et al.  Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come , 2004 .

[7]  Marc Berg,et al.  Patient care information systems and health care work: a sociotechnical approach , 1999, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[8]  M Sandelowski,et al.  Combining qualitative and quantitative sampling, data collection, and analysis techniques in mixed-method studies. , 2000, Research in nursing & health.

[9]  Marc Berg,et al.  Considerations for sociotechnical design: experiences with an electronic patient record in a clinical context , 1998, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[10]  Elske Ammenwerth,et al.  Can evaluation studies benefit from triangulation? A case study , 2003, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[11]  Elske Ammenwerth,et al.  Evaluation of health information systems - problems and challenges , 2003, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[12]  E. Ammenwerth,et al.  Evaluation of the electronic transmission of medical findings from hospitals to practitioners by triangulation. , 2006, Methods of information in medicine.

[13]  B. Kaplan,et al.  Future Directions in Evaluation Research: People, Organizational, and Social Issues , 2004, Methods of Information in Medicine.

[14]  Stacie Petter,et al.  Toward a framework for classifying and guiding mixed method research in information systems , 2004, 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the.

[15]  Miguel P Caldas,et al.  Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches , 2003 .

[16]  M Berg,et al.  Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Methods in Patient Care Information System Evaluation , 2003, Methods of Information in Medicine.