Converting qualitative data into quantitative values using a matched mixed-methods design: A new methodological approach

• Published in: Journal of advanced nursing 2023-11, Vol.79 (11), p.4398-4410
• Main Authors: Halevi Hochwald, Inbal, Green, Gizell, Sela, Yael, Radomyslsky, Zorian, Nissanholtz-Gannot, Rachel, Hochwald, Ori
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Caregivers; Dementia; Interviews; Mixed methods research; Nurses; Physicians; Qualitative research; Questionnaires; Research methodology; Values
• ISSN: 0309-2402; 1365-2648
• DOI: 10.1111/jan.15649

Quantifying qualitative data as part of mixed-methods research (MMR) can add to the study results' analysis. Comparable results may reinforce the conclusions, while differences hold an opportunity for an in-depth discussion. To date, there is little guidance for researchers seeking to quantify their qualitative data. Describing conversion of qualitative data to quantitative values, comparison with matched questionnaire results, discussing the benefits of this process and the matched MMR design. We describe in detail how qualitative data from 46 interviews were converted into quantitative values (i.e., quantitative-qualitative values, QQVs) using MMR design, enabling a comparison of results from interviews and questionnaires obtained from the same participants. This process was embedded in a larger MMR study on family-caregivers caring for people-with-end-stage-dementia conducted between the years 2020-2021. A QQV was generated for three main themes and compared to the questionnaires' scores regarding the same topics. There were no significant differences between the scores regarding 'satisfaction with nurses and physicians care', and 'discussion with nurses and physicians about end-of-life care'. However, for 'burden', the QQV score was significantly higher than the questionnaires' score. We described how to use a matched MMR design to produce and compare QQV from interviews with questionnaire scores. This methodology may allow further valuable discussion if the results are either similar or not, and for better integration and easier presentation of the results. Comparable results can reinforce the conclusions from both parts of the MMR study, while differences hold an opportunity for an in-depth discussion regarding their meaning and context. Although we claim that this methodology can be embedded in the MMR structure and contribute significantly to the discussion's depth, it by no means replaces the traditional MMR design. No patient or public contribution.