NRS 433 Topic 5 DQ 1 

 

 

 

Topic 5 DQ 1 

 

Name 

Institution 

Course 

Date

Topic 5 DQ 1 

May 2-4, 2022 

The theoretical foundations of qualitative and quantitative methods are very different, but many researchers believe both methods should be used in the research study to increase validity and reliability. What advantages or disadvantages do you see in using both types of methods in a nursing study? Support your answer with current evidence-based literature. 

Mireille Ulysse 

Posted Date 

May 5, 2022, 6:15 PM 

Replies to Mireille Ulysse 

The application of quantitative and qualitative research methods is different, but when the two are used together in research, they increase reliability and availability from the roles played. The quantitative designs used in research are correlational, descriptive, experimental, and quasi. Qualitative research design gives exploratory aspects of the research. Through them, the researcher gains the underlying reasons for opinions, motivations, and reasons concerning the research problem, thus providing the insights to develop ideas and hypotheses (Rahman, 2020). With the mixed research method, the two approaches are integrated within one research activity for certain benefits but are also accompanied by disadvantages. 

The main advantage of using mixed methods is reducing errors and understanding the contradictions from the different types of data presented. Using the mixture methods makes the challenges of one of the research methods overcome with the other method (Ivankova & Wingo, 2018). Besides, the mixture of two research methods gives a range of multidisciplinary teams to give the gives based on qualitative and quantitative research data. Hence, more insight and professionalism when dealing with the collected data. The last advantage of using the two methods combined is that it gives more comprehensive and detailed information than when the research methodology is used. 

On the other hand, mixed methods face complex planning and research problems. Using both methods need enough knowledge and skills to be appropriately implemented since researchers must be open to different ways that are not within their area of specialization (Molina-Azorin et al., 2018). The mixed methods are labor-intensive as more labor and resources are required to carry out research with the mixed methods than using a single method for the study. 

Ivankova, N., & Wingo, N. (2018). Applying mixed methods in action research: Methodological potentials and advantages. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(7), 978-997. 

Molina-Azorin, J. F., Tarí, J. J., Lopez-Gamero, M. D., Pereira-Moliner, J., & Pertusa-Ortega, E. (2018). The implementation and advantages of mixed methods in competitive strategy and management systems.  

Rahman, M. S. (2020). The advantages and disadvantages of using qualitative and quantitative approaches and methods in language “testing and assessment” research: A literature review. 

  •  

Jana Garcia 

replied toMireille Ulysse 

May 7, 2022, 8:24 PM 

  Replies to Mireille Ulysse 

H Mireille,  

Mixed method research “draws on potential strengths of both qualitative and quantitative methods allowing researchers to explore diverse perspectives and uncover relationships that exist between the intricate layers of our multifaceted research questions” (Shorten, 2017). The reason this is so important because our patient safety highly depends on the information we receive from the studies. Researchers retrieve this information from data integration. Data integration “enables researchers to seek a more panoramic view of their research landscape, viewing phenomena from different viewpoints and through diverse research lenses” (Shorten, 2017). The three types of mixed methods of study include exploratory sequential, parallel, and nested. An example in nursing research in an exploratory sequential is studying work related symptoms of stress (quan) while measuring the number of nurses by survey (qual) who report symptoms. This mixed study helps the researcher understand two things, how many nurses report stress and the common symptom they experience from that stress. Leadership can use this information to determine how stressful their work environments are and attempt to resolve the situation with either added staff or stress related intervention such as massages or offering a free gym and wellness groups to employees. Stakeholders are going to want justification for funding, and research provides validity to the problem. The same example, a parallel study is completed concurrently, research will measure symptoms of stress (quan) and how many nurses call out of work (qual) during the time it is reported. Using the same example with nested research, the study could start with how many nurses called off (qual) and if stress related symptoms were reported in those call offs (quan). Mixed method research gives us a better understanding of the same situation from different views of understanding. Thank you, Jana  

 

Shorten A, Smith J., (2017) Mixed methods research: expanding the evidence base. Evidence-Based Nursing 20:74-75. 

 

  Tracy Tibbs-Briggs 

replied toMireille Ulysse 

May 8, 2022, 12:24 AM 

  • Replies to Mireille Ulysse 

A mixed-method increases the researcher’s knowledge and creates a more in-depth understanding of the subject to be studied (Schoonenboom & Johnson, 2017). Combining the subjective and objective data creates a holistic picture of the problem or issue to be researched. There is much more to data gathering than numbers when the subjects are participants. People make a complex dimension to a study because other factors influence the outcome of a survey based on how the subject feels (CDC. 2022). Though each subject will react differently in a clinical study because they are different people with different experiences, the overall sense of side effects, adverse effects, and reactions may remain consistent between participants. Therefore, adding individually to a study brings it full circle to cause and effect and the why of a study (Regnault et al., 2018). Why do patients not adhere to medications? How does the patient feel? Why are they unmotivated to change? These can better help the reasons behind the obstacles our patients face and allow us to be better advocates to our patients if we can better understand them. It closes the communication gap to ask the right questions if we can understand patients’ mental and physical aspects. 

References 

 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC]. (2022). Collecting and Analyzing Qualitative Data. Cdc.gov. https://www.cdc.gov/eis/field-epi-manual/chapters/Qualitative-Data.html 

 

Regnault, A., Willgoss, T., & Barbic, S. (2018). Towards the use of mixed methods inquiry as best practice in health outcomes research. Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-018-0043-8 

 

Schoonenboom, J., & Johnson, R. B. (2017). How to Construct a Mixed Methods Research Design. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift Für Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie, 69(S2), 107–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-017-0454-1 

 

Tamara Houston 

Posted Date 

May 4, 2022, 6:38 PM(edited) 

Replies to Mireille Ulysse 

When utilizing both qualitative and quantitative research methods, to me it seems as though using mixed methods has more advantages than disadvantages. It basically allows the researcher to utilize a holistic approach to research by allowing things to be studied from different aspects to get the whole picture. Depending on the study, using a mixed method allows the researcher to understand perception, behaviors, or experiences of research through the qualitative method and also allows for measurement of data through experiment, correlation, or data collection by way of the quantitative method. Combining the two approaches can produce more scientifically sound and transferable results by synergistically integrating qualitative stakeholder engagement with quantitative outcomes to inform action/intervention planning, implementation, evaluation, and monitoring (Ivankova & Wingo, 2018). This is the basis and blueprint for evidence-based nursing practice you would think. There are disadvantages to using this mixed method as well. Inadequate justification for using mixed-methods and inadequate data integration compromises the rigor of mixed-methods studies, and data integration remains a challenge for nurse researchers (Younas et al., 2019). Due to such an abundance of information to try and mold together, researchers may find it challenging to analyze such data and also present it in an unorganized manner which ultimately can diminish the quality of the research. 

 

Ivankova, N., & Wingo, N. (2018). Applying mixed methods in action research: Methodological potentials and advantages. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(7), 978–997. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218772673 

 

Younas, A., Pedersen, M., & Tayaben, J. L. (2019). Review of mixed-methods research in nursing. Nursing Research, 68(6), 464-472. doi: 10.1097/NNR.0000000000000372 

  •  

Tracy Tibbs-Briggs 

replied toTamara Houston 

May 6, 2022, 11:15 PM 

  • Replies to Tamara Houston 

Tamara, I understand the con mixed research methods due to the amount of information the researcher is responsible for collecting. However, I do believe in most of these experiments. Different people are doing various tasks. There is a vested interest in laying out the study in highly complex studies before the investigation begins with a biostatistician. In a study, especially as massive as a mixed study, biostatisticians, not the scientist, are responsible for the experiment’s size and layout (Ciolino et al., 2021). They help the scientist decide on the right questions and the purpose of the study. They are the accountants of science because they make sense of the numbers and design a clear path. Scientists are good at theories and reasons, but we are not always the best at creating clear pathways to answers and results (Zapf et al., 2020). Therefore, planning for a large-scale mixed research project is just as important as the project itself, if not more valuable. The layout of a project can create clear pathways and decrease miscommunication (Li et al., 2018). Reducing time and money to conduct a valid and reliable randomized controlled study and creating a clear picture from the data collected from qualitative research will help guide the quantitative numbers. 

References 

 

Ciolino, J. D., Spino, C., Ambrosius, W. T., Khalatbari, S., Cayetano, S. M., Lapidus, J. A., Nietert, P. J., Oster, R. A., Perkins, S. M., Pollock, B. H., Pomann, G.-M., Price, L. L., Rice, T. W., Tosteson, T. D., Lindsell, C. J., & Spratt, H. (2021). Guidance for biostatisticians on their essential contributions to clinical and translational research protocol review. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2021.814 

 

Li, Z., Wang, X., Barnhart, H. X., & Wang, Y. (2018). Working With Statisticians in Clinical Research. Stroke, 49(11). https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.118.022266 

 

Zapf, A., Rauch, G., & Kieser, M. (2020). Why do you need a biostatistician? BMC Medical Research Methodology, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-0916-4 

 

 

Natalya Kramarczyk 

Posted Date 

May 4, 2022, 6:01 PM 

Replies to Mireille Ulysse 

Two main original types of research methods exist qualitative and quantitative methods. These methods have their potential pros and drawbacks in promoting evidence-based practice. Studies using quantitative methods communicate information using numerical findings while qualitative studies use the description of phenomena. The qualitative methods describe phenomena in rich detail while quantitative studies study the relationships, causes, and effects. Therefore, qualitative methods seek to answer the question ‘why’ while quantitative methods seek to answer the questions ‘how much’ and ‘how many.’ 

Quantitative methods designs are developed before the study thus more rigid while qualitative methods are usually flexible and can evolve even during the study. Therefore, qualitative methods enable a flexible discourse. Quantitative methods are best for studies requiring finding numerical answers to research questions. However, there are some parameters in research studies that are not quantifiable or countable. To report these parameters, the researcher will require to use both methods. The researcher, therefore, needs to use a mixed-method study that incorporates both qualitative and quantitative designs.  

Using mixed methods in a nursing study can provide with depth and breadth of understanding of occurrences and phenomena. This enables to get a better understanding of the study issue and acquire more complete evidence (Johnson, 2019). In addition, incorporating both methods in the research can provide context-rich answers to a research questions and study hypothesis thus quality findings (Hunter & Armour, 2019). However, the resultant design will require more time to carry out as compared with a study with one design. Even though mixed method helps to answer complex questions in the study (Kaur et al., 2019), the resources that will require will be more expensive bearing in mind that the two methods will run concurrently but different designs.  

Resources 

 

Hunter, J., & Armour, M. (2019). Stop, listen, and learn: Using mixed methods to add value to clinical trials. Journal of Evidence-Based Integrative Medicine, 24, 2515690X19857073. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515690X19857073  

 

Johnson, S. L. (2019). Impact, growth, capacity-building of Mixed Methods Research in the Health Sciences. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 83(2), 7403. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe7403  

 

Kaur, N., Vedel, I., El Sherif, R., & Pluye, P. (2019). Practical mixed methods strategies used to integrate qualitative and quantitative methods in community-based primary health care research. Family Practice, 36(5), 666–671. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmz010  

  •  

Sandra Noel-Lewis 

replied toNatalya Kramarczyk 

May 5, 2022, 6:36 AM 

  • Replies to Natalya Kramarczyk 

Hi Natalya, 

Mixed methods research has advantages that outweighs the disadvantages that it can produce. The research can be difficult to organize or implement and there may be unresolved discrepancies. Overall, there are a couple of mixed methods research advantages that are said to be useful. Doorenbos, A (2014) elaborates on simultaneous and sequential sequencing which have been proposed for mixed methods design. Doorenbos, A (2014) continues to explain one of the most important decisions in mixed methods study design is the type of sequencing. Simultaneous sequencing is defined as the simultaneous employment of qualitative and quantitative methodologists during data collection with little interaction between the two sources of data. However, the information gathered is employed in the data interpretation stage to back up each method’s conclusions and achieve a final conclusion. When the outcomes of one approach are required for preparing the next method, sequential sequencing is proposed as the usage of one before the other (Doorenbos, A (2014). 

 

Reference 

 

Doorenbos A. Z. (2014). Mixed Methods in Nursing Research: An Overview and Practical Examples. Kango kenkyu. The Japanese journal of nursing research, 47(3), 207–217. 

 

Tracy Tibbs-Briggs 

Posted Date 

May 4, 2022, 9:32 AM 

Replies to Mireille Ulysse 

There are more advantages to doing a mixed study than there are disadvantages. For one, mixed research allows for fluidity between information. The best thing about mixed studies is they will enable the researcher to build the study from start to finish, depending on whether the searchers start with qualitative data and transition to quantitative data.  Then, based on their information, they can build a study base on the constant relatable themes within the subjects. Going from quantitative to qualitative is the best method because it decreases the likelihood of bias from a smaller qualitative group.  In addition, it is more consistent to build personal qualitative data off of numerical data because it is less likely to be swayed by interpretation(Johnson et al., 2019).  

Another key reason mixed studies are better is that they allow the research to follow the study from start to finish. Whereas, with many studies done separately, there are different groups and studies done at various locations, creating a lack of fluidity between what the subjects feel and the numerical data (Regnault et al., 2018). However, this may also be the most significant disadvantage of doing mixed reviews because of the consistency. Consistency in science, especially in qualitative data, can increase the likelihood of extraneous variables, especially from within the research department due to the study’s longevity and subjects (Allen, 2017).  

 

References 

 

Allen, M. (2017). The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods. 1-4. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483381411 

 

Johnson, J. L., Adkins, D., & Chauvin, S. (2019). A Review of the Quality Indicators of Rigor in Qualitative Research. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 84(1), 7120. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe7120 

 

Regnault, A., Willgoss, T., & Barbic, S. (2018). Towards the use of mixed methods inquiry as best practice in health outcomes research. Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-018-0043-8 

 

  •  

Gale Storm-Bryant 

replied toTracy Tibbs-Briggs 

May 5, 2022, 9:22 PM 

  • Replies to Tracy Tibbs-Briggs 

Tracy, 

A mixed study is more holistic, mixed studie

 

Topic 5 DQ 1 

Aging occurs with numerous changes caused by physiological changes in various body systems. It is characterized by changes in body composition evidenced by reduced muscle mass and deteriorating changes in muscles, bones, and joints. Musculoskeletal system changes can be attributed to reduced muscle strength and height loss in older adults (Amarya et al., 2018). The changes increase the risk of falls and fall-related injuries in the elderly population. In addition, numerous changes occur in the neurological system due to a reduced brain’s capacity to convey signals, causing a decline in memory, learning, cognition, and intelligence. Cognitive decline results in conditions such as Alzheimer’s dementia and Parkinson’s.  

Cardiovascular changes include decreased heart rate and constriction of blood vessels, which increases contractility and elevates blood pressure. Respiratory age-related changes include shrunk respiratory muscles and loss of lung tissue elasticity. The changes cause abnormal breathing patterns and increase the risk of respiratory infections (Amarya et al., 2018). The GI system also undergoes changes, such as teeth loss, reduced saliva secretion, delayed digestive process, and altered bowel movements resulting in incontinence or constipation. 

The body changes in aging are detrimental and put the elderly at risk of abuse, a common concern in this population. Changes in the musculoskeletal and neurological systems reduce the ability to perform ADLs independently, making older adults rely on others (Rosen et al., 2018). The dependency on others for ADLs makes them vulnerable to neglect, physical, emotional, and sexual abuse. Besides, the reduced muscle strength increases their vulnerability to physical assault since they cannot defend themselves.  

A health assessment for a geriatric patient varies from middle-aged adults since the nurse should take a comprehensive medical history for the geriatric. The medical history should include details of all the present medical illnesses and the previous and current treatments used (Garrard et al., 2020). Besides, the social history for a geriatric should be thorough, identifying the patient’s caregiver, living status, support system, and ability to carry out ADLs. Geriatrics are at risk of malnutrition, and thus the nurse should conduct a nutrition assessment.   

 

References 

Amarya, S., Singh, K., & Sabharwal, M. (2018). Ageing Process and Physiological Changes. In Gerontology. IntechOpenhttps://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.76249 

Garrard, J. W., Cox, N. J., Dodds, R. M., Roberts, H. C., & Sayer, A. A. (2020). Comprehensive geriatric assessment in primary care: a systematic review. Aging clinical and experimental research, 32(2), 197–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-019-01183-w 

Rosen, T., Stern, M. E., Elman, A., & Mulcare, M. R. (2018). Identifying and Initiating Intervention for Elder Abuse and Neglect in the Emergency Department. Clinics in geriatric medicine, 34(3), 435–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cger.2018.04.007