Abstract

BackgroundQuantitative studies are becoming more recognized as important to understanding health care with all of its richness and complexities. The purpose of this descriptive survey was to provide a quantitative evaluation of the qualitative studies published in 170 core clinical journals for 2000.MethodsAll identified studies that used qualitative methods were reviewed to ascertain which clinical journals publish qualitative studies and to extract research methods, content (persons and health care issues studied), and whether mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative methods) were used.Results60 330 articles were reviewed. 355 reports of original qualitative studies and 12 systematic review articles were identified in 48 journals. Most of the journals were in the discipline of nursing. Only 4 of the most highly cited health care journals, based on ISI Science Citation Index (SCI) Impact Factors, published qualitative studies. 37 of the 355 original reports used both qualitative and quantitative (mixed) methods. Patients and non-health care settings were the most common groups of people studied. Diseases and conditions were cancer, mental health, pregnancy and childbirth, and cerebrovascular disease with many other diseases and conditions represented. Phenomenology and grounded theory were commonly used; substantial ethnography was also present. No substantial differences were noted for content or methods when articles published in all disciplines were compared with articles published in nursing titles or when studies with mixed methods were compared with studies that included only qualitative methods.ConclusionsThe clinical literature includes many qualitative studies although they are often published in nursing journals or journals with low SCI Impact Factor journals. Many qualitative studies incorporate both qualitative and quantitative methods.

Highlights

  • Quantitative studies are becoming more recognized as important to understanding health care with all of its richness and complexities

  • BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2004, 4:11 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6947/4/11 experiences working in family medicine, a clinical domain where balancing qualitative and quantitative research styles benefits both patients and their families and health care professionals

  • We identified mixed methods articles using a loose criterion of "some numerical or statistical analysis of quantitative data or qualitative data that had been turned into quantitative data". (An example of quantifying qualitative data is the study done by Borkan and colleagues [8] on hip fracture.) The analysis had to be fairly substantial– for example, a simple descriptive analysis of baseline demographics of the participants was not sufficient to be included as a mixed methods article

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Quantitative studies are becoming more recognized as important to understanding health care with all of its richness and complexities The purpose of this descriptive survey was to provide a quantitative evaluation of the qualitative studies published in 170 core clinical journals for 2000. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2004, 4:11 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6947/4/11 experiences working in family medicine, a clinical domain where balancing qualitative and quantitative research styles benefits both patients and their families and health care professionals. They embrace holding "quantitative objectivism in one hand and qualitative revelations in another" and encourage others to use findings from both paradigms in understanding and practicing effective health care. Creswell and colleagues expand on this theme by stating that "When used in combination, both quantitative and qualitative data yield a more complete analysis, and they complement each other" [2]

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call