Loading…
Guidance for deciding upon use of primary mixed methods studies in research synthesis: lessons learned in childhood trauma
When reviewing literature, mixed methods studies (MMS) are increasingly retrieved, yet it is unclear how they should be dealt with in a research synthesis. In this article we examine the inclusion of primary MMS in research synthesis, based on experiences with a meta-analysis (MA) and a qualitative...
Saved in:
Published in: | Quality & quantity 2014-03, Vol.48 (2), p.1075-1088 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-f5f328d4018e988c08e46068feb4c6840fe874e698cc077d8f670c6ce03343643 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-f5f328d4018e988c08e46068feb4c6840fe874e698cc077d8f670c6ce03343643 |
container_end_page | 1088 |
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 1075 |
container_title | Quality & quantity |
container_volume | 48 |
creator | Boeije, H. van Wesel, F. Slagt, M. |
description | When reviewing literature, mixed methods studies (MMS) are increasingly retrieved, yet it is unclear how they should be dealt with in a research synthesis. In this article we examine the inclusion of primary MMS in research synthesis, based on experiences with a meta-analysis (MA) and a qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) in childhood trauma. The aim is to offer guidance for reviewers in deciding upon the use of MMS. This review article examines (1) the qualitative component, (2) the quantitative component, as well as (3) the third component of combined yield for use in a MA, a QES or a mixed studies review. A systematic search for MMS in the field of childhood trauma from January 1980 to October 2011 resulted in twelve MMS. Eight qualitative components, six quantitative components and one combined yield could have been included in a MA or QES. Exclusion of qualitative components was due to insufficient quality. Quantitative components were excluded because sample sizes were too small, different outcome measures than ours were used or no adequate statistics were provided. Yield could not be included because it was absent, outside the scope or otherwise unspecified. Finally, we offer flow charts with clear steps to assist researchers in deciding upon the use of components of MMS. Our study demonstrates that MMS can cover new areas and therefore cannot be neglected in a research synthesis. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11135-012-9825-x |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1501585104</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A739910544</galeid><sourcerecordid>A739910544</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-f5f328d4018e988c08e46068feb4c6840fe874e698cc077d8f670c6ce03343643</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kcFq3DAQhk1pods0D5CboJdenI5WkiX3FkKbFAK9tGfhSqO1gi1tNTZs-vTV4hxKIegwIL5vmJm_aa44XHMA_Yk450K1wPdtb_aqPb1qdlxp0Woj1etmByBEq7jWb5t3RI8A1ZJ61_y5W6MfkkMWcmEeXfQxHdh6zImthCwHdixxHsoTm-MJPZtxGbMnRsvqIxKLiRUkHIobGT2lZUSK9JlNSJQT1TqUVLWKuTFOfszZs6UM6zy8b96EYSK8fK4Xzc-vX37c3rcP3---3d48tE4Ys7RBBbE3XgI32BvjwKDsoDMBf0nXGQkBjZbY9cY50Nqb0GlwncO6sRSdFBfNx63vseTfK9Ji50gOp2lImFeyXAFXRnE4ox_-Qx_zWlKdznLZCw5C665S1xt1GCa0MYVcF3L1eZyjywlDrP83WvQ9ByXPbfkmuJKJCgb7fFPLwZ7js1t8tsZnz_HZU3X2m0OVTQcs_4zyovQXQr6eJA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1493103776</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Guidance for deciding upon use of primary mixed methods studies in research synthesis: lessons learned in childhood trauma</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>Social Science Premium Collection</source><source>ABI/INFORM Global</source><source>Springer Nature</source><source>Sociology Collection</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>Boeije, H. ; van Wesel, F. ; Slagt, M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Boeije, H. ; van Wesel, F. ; Slagt, M.</creatorcontrib><description>When reviewing literature, mixed methods studies (MMS) are increasingly retrieved, yet it is unclear how they should be dealt with in a research synthesis. In this article we examine the inclusion of primary MMS in research synthesis, based on experiences with a meta-analysis (MA) and a qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) in childhood trauma. The aim is to offer guidance for reviewers in deciding upon the use of MMS. This review article examines (1) the qualitative component, (2) the quantitative component, as well as (3) the third component of combined yield for use in a MA, a QES or a mixed studies review. A systematic search for MMS in the field of childhood trauma from January 1980 to October 2011 resulted in twelve MMS. Eight qualitative components, six quantitative components and one combined yield could have been included in a MA or QES. Exclusion of qualitative components was due to insufficient quality. Quantitative components were excluded because sample sizes were too small, different outcome measures than ours were used or no adequate statistics were provided. Yield could not be included because it was absent, outside the scope or otherwise unspecified. Finally, we offer flow charts with clear steps to assist researchers in deciding upon the use of components of MMS. Our study demonstrates that MMS can cover new areas and therefore cannot be neglected in a research synthesis.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0033-5177</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-7845</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11135-012-9825-x</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Behavioral sciences ; Childhood ; Children ; Children & youth ; Meta-analysis ; Methodology of the Social Sciences ; Mixed methods research ; Post traumatic stress disorder ; Qualitative research ; Quantitative analysis ; Research methodology ; Research methods ; Social Sciences ; Statistics ; Studies ; Systematic review ; Trauma</subject><ispartof>Quality & quantity, 2014-03, Vol.48 (2), p.1075-1088</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2014 Springer</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-f5f328d4018e988c08e46068feb4c6840fe874e698cc077d8f670c6ce03343643</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-f5f328d4018e988c08e46068feb4c6840fe874e698cc077d8f670c6ce03343643</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1493103776/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1493103776?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,11688,12847,21394,21395,27344,27924,27925,33223,33224,33611,33612,33774,34530,34531,36060,36061,43733,44115,44363,74221,74639,74895</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Boeije, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Wesel, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Slagt, M.</creatorcontrib><title>Guidance for deciding upon use of primary mixed methods studies in research synthesis: lessons learned in childhood trauma</title><title>Quality & quantity</title><addtitle>Qual Quant</addtitle><description>When reviewing literature, mixed methods studies (MMS) are increasingly retrieved, yet it is unclear how they should be dealt with in a research synthesis. In this article we examine the inclusion of primary MMS in research synthesis, based on experiences with a meta-analysis (MA) and a qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) in childhood trauma. The aim is to offer guidance for reviewers in deciding upon the use of MMS. This review article examines (1) the qualitative component, (2) the quantitative component, as well as (3) the third component of combined yield for use in a MA, a QES or a mixed studies review. A systematic search for MMS in the field of childhood trauma from January 1980 to October 2011 resulted in twelve MMS. Eight qualitative components, six quantitative components and one combined yield could have been included in a MA or QES. Exclusion of qualitative components was due to insufficient quality. Quantitative components were excluded because sample sizes were too small, different outcome measures than ours were used or no adequate statistics were provided. Yield could not be included because it was absent, outside the scope or otherwise unspecified. Finally, we offer flow charts with clear steps to assist researchers in deciding upon the use of components of MMS. Our study demonstrates that MMS can cover new areas and therefore cannot be neglected in a research synthesis.</description><subject>Behavioral sciences</subject><subject>Childhood</subject><subject>Children</subject><subject>Children & youth</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Methodology of the Social Sciences</subject><subject>Mixed methods research</subject><subject>Post traumatic stress disorder</subject><subject>Qualitative research</subject><subject>Quantitative analysis</subject><subject>Research methodology</subject><subject>Research methods</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Statistics</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Trauma</subject><issn>0033-5177</issn><issn>1573-7845</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>HEHIP</sourceid><sourceid>M0C</sourceid><sourceid>M2R</sourceid><sourceid>M2S</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kcFq3DAQhk1pods0D5CboJdenI5WkiX3FkKbFAK9tGfhSqO1gi1tNTZs-vTV4hxKIegwIL5vmJm_aa44XHMA_Yk450K1wPdtb_aqPb1qdlxp0Woj1etmByBEq7jWb5t3RI8A1ZJ61_y5W6MfkkMWcmEeXfQxHdh6zImthCwHdixxHsoTm-MJPZtxGbMnRsvqIxKLiRUkHIobGT2lZUSK9JlNSJQT1TqUVLWKuTFOfszZs6UM6zy8b96EYSK8fK4Xzc-vX37c3rcP3---3d48tE4Ys7RBBbE3XgI32BvjwKDsoDMBf0nXGQkBjZbY9cY50Nqb0GlwncO6sRSdFBfNx63vseTfK9Ji50gOp2lImFeyXAFXRnE4ox_-Qx_zWlKdznLZCw5C665S1xt1GCa0MYVcF3L1eZyjywlDrP83WvQ9ByXPbfkmuJKJCgb7fFPLwZ7js1t8tsZnz_HZU3X2m0OVTQcs_4zyovQXQr6eJA</recordid><startdate>20140301</startdate><enddate>20140301</enddate><creator>Boeije, H.</creator><creator>van Wesel, F.</creator><creator>Slagt, M.</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140301</creationdate><title>Guidance for deciding upon use of primary mixed methods studies in research synthesis: lessons learned in childhood trauma</title><author>Boeije, H. ; van Wesel, F. ; Slagt, M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-f5f328d4018e988c08e46068feb4c6840fe874e698cc077d8f670c6ce03343643</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Behavioral sciences</topic><topic>Childhood</topic><topic>Children</topic><topic>Children & youth</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Methodology of the Social Sciences</topic><topic>Mixed methods research</topic><topic>Post traumatic stress disorder</topic><topic>Qualitative research</topic><topic>Quantitative analysis</topic><topic>Research methodology</topic><topic>Research methods</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Statistics</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Trauma</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Boeije, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Wesel, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Slagt, M.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Science Database</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Quality & quantity</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Boeije, H.</au><au>van Wesel, F.</au><au>Slagt, M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Guidance for deciding upon use of primary mixed methods studies in research synthesis: lessons learned in childhood trauma</atitle><jtitle>Quality & quantity</jtitle><stitle>Qual Quant</stitle><date>2014-03-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>48</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>1075</spage><epage>1088</epage><pages>1075-1088</pages><issn>0033-5177</issn><eissn>1573-7845</eissn><abstract>When reviewing literature, mixed methods studies (MMS) are increasingly retrieved, yet it is unclear how they should be dealt with in a research synthesis. In this article we examine the inclusion of primary MMS in research synthesis, based on experiences with a meta-analysis (MA) and a qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) in childhood trauma. The aim is to offer guidance for reviewers in deciding upon the use of MMS. This review article examines (1) the qualitative component, (2) the quantitative component, as well as (3) the third component of combined yield for use in a MA, a QES or a mixed studies review. A systematic search for MMS in the field of childhood trauma from January 1980 to October 2011 resulted in twelve MMS. Eight qualitative components, six quantitative components and one combined yield could have been included in a MA or QES. Exclusion of qualitative components was due to insufficient quality. Quantitative components were excluded because sample sizes were too small, different outcome measures than ours were used or no adequate statistics were provided. Yield could not be included because it was absent, outside the scope or otherwise unspecified. Finally, we offer flow charts with clear steps to assist researchers in deciding upon the use of components of MMS. Our study demonstrates that MMS can cover new areas and therefore cannot be neglected in a research synthesis.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><doi>10.1007/s11135-012-9825-x</doi><tpages>14</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0033-5177 |
ispartof | Quality & quantity, 2014-03, Vol.48 (2), p.1075-1088 |
issn | 0033-5177 1573-7845 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1501585104 |
source | International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); Social Science Premium Collection; ABI/INFORM Global; Springer Nature; Sociology Collection; Sociological Abstracts |
subjects | Behavioral sciences Childhood Children Children & youth Meta-analysis Methodology of the Social Sciences Mixed methods research Post traumatic stress disorder Qualitative research Quantitative analysis Research methodology Research methods Social Sciences Statistics Studies Systematic review Trauma |
title | Guidance for deciding upon use of primary mixed methods studies in research synthesis: lessons learned in childhood trauma |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-30T16%3A53%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Guidance%20for%20deciding%20upon%20use%20of%20primary%20mixed%20methods%20studies%20in%20research%20synthesis:%20lessons%20learned%20in%20childhood%20trauma&rft.jtitle=Quality%20&%20quantity&rft.au=Boeije,%20H.&rft.date=2014-03-01&rft.volume=48&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=1075&rft.epage=1088&rft.pages=1075-1088&rft.issn=0033-5177&rft.eissn=1573-7845&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11135-012-9825-x&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA739910544%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-f5f328d4018e988c08e46068feb4c6840fe874e698cc077d8f670c6ce03343643%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1493103776&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A739910544&rfr_iscdi=true |