Innovations in Mixed Methods Evaluations

200Citations
Citations of this article
599Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Mixed methods research - i.e., research that draws on both qualitative and quantitative methods in varying configurations - is well suited to address the increasing complexity of public health problems and their solutions. This review focuses specifically on innovations in mixed methods evaluations of intervention, program or policy (i.e., practice) effectiveness, and implementation. The article begins with an overview of the structure, function, and process of different mixed methods designs and then provides illustrations of their use in effectiveness studies, implementation studies, and combined effectiveness-implementation hybrid studies. The article then examines four specific innovations: procedures for transforming (or "quantitizing") qualitative data, application of rapid assessment and analysis procedures in the context of mixed methods studies, development of measures to assess implementation outcomes, and strategies for conducting both random and purposive sampling, particularly in implementation-focused evaluation research. The article concludes with an assessment of challenges to integrating qualitative and quantitative data in evaluation research.

References Powered by Scopus

Three approaches to qualitative content analysis

29562Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science

8958Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research

6614Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Qualitative methods in implementation research: An introduction

578Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Autism spectrum disorder: Definition, epidemiology, causes, and clinical evaluation

497Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Rapid versus traditional qualitative analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR)

265Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Palinkas, L. A., Mendon, S. J., & Hamilton, A. B. (2019, April 1). Innovations in Mixed Methods Evaluations. Annual Review of Public Health. Annual Reviews Inc. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040218-044215

Readers over time

‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘2504080120160

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 178

60%

Researcher 74

25%

Professor / Associate Prof. 24

8%

Lecturer / Post doc 20

7%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Social Sciences 56

28%

Medicine and Dentistry 56

28%

Nursing and Health Professions 48

24%

Psychology 40

20%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
News Mentions: 1
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0