Examining Methods and Designs

Examining Methods and Designs

The DNP must have a basic knowledge of quantitative methodology and design as it contrasts with qualitative and mixed methods. With this knowledge, the DNP can differentiate between methods and designs used to evaluate the evidence. This assignment includes comparing methodology and design while examining the external and internal validity of three projects or studies.

General Requirements:

Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:

• Before beginning this assignment, review the following three articles provided as topic Resources:

• “A Mental Health Home Visit Service Partnership Intervention on Improving Patients’ Satisfaction”; Cheng, J. Huang, X., Lin, M. Wang, Y. & Yeh, P. (2018). A mental health home visit service partnership intervention on improving patients’ satisfaction. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 32(4), 610-616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2018.03.010
• “Chronic Drug Treatment Among Hemodialysis Patients: A Qualitative Study of Patients, Nursing, and Medical Staff Attitudes and Approaches”; Gilad, L., Haviv, Y. S., Cohen-Glickman, I., Chinitz, D., & Cohen, M. J. (2020). Chronic drug treatment among hemodialysis patients: A qualitative study of patients, nursing, and medical staff attitudes and approaches. BMC Nephrology, 21(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12882-020-01900-y        and
• “Factors Influencing Hand Hygiene Practice of Nursing Students: A Descriptive, Mixed-Methods Study.” Zimmerman, P. P., Sladdin, I., Shaban, R. Z., Gilbert, J. & Brown, L. (2020). Factors influencing hand hygiene practice of nursing students: A descriptive, mixed-methods study. Nurse Education in Practice, 44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2020.102746

• Use the “Comparison Table of Methods and Designs” template – See Attached.
• Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments.

Directions:

Part 1:

Using the “Comparison Table of Methods and Designs,” evaluate the three projects or studies indicated above. (See Table Attached)

Part 2:

Refer to the information from your “Comparison Table of Methods and Designs” and write a 1,000-1,250-word paper comparing the methods and designs of the three articles. Include the following in your paper:

1. Description of the characteristics associated with the method of each article.
2. Description of the characteristics associated with the design of each article.
3. Description of the statistical analysis associated with the method and design of each article.
4. Discussion of the reliability and validity issues associated with each methodology and design.
5. Summary comparing the different methods and designs used in the studies.
6. Attach the “Comparison Table of Methods and Designs” document as an appendix to your paper.

 

Examining Methods and Designs Sample Solution

Research methods and designs provide frameworks for answering foreground questions, testing hypotheses, and explaining relationships between independent and dependent variables. According to Scholtz, de Klerk & de Beer (2020), quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method (multi-method) research designs influence how researchers collect and analyze data. In this case, inappropriate selection of research methods and designs can compromise how researchers utilize their research skills and affect the credibility of research findings and the subsequent development of theories. Amidst the significance of the three broad research methods, this paper compares three studies that satisfy the criteria for quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method research methods and designs.

Description of the Characteristics Associated with the Method of Each Article

In the article “A mental health home visit service partnership intervention on improving patients’ Satisfaction,” Cheng et al. (2018) conducted a quantitative study investigating a partnership intervention between community-based and hospital-based visits to improve patient satisfaction. As quantitative research, the study emphasized quantifiable data collection and analysis methods to establish participants’ satisfaction with mental health home visit services. Emphasis on quantifiable data is the primary characteristic of quantitative research methods. In the second study, “Chronic drug treatment among hemodialysis patients: A qualitative study of Patients, nursing, and medical staff attitudes and Approaches,” Gilad et al. (2020) adopted qualitative methodologies to investigate patients’ and staff’s concepts and attitudes regarding medication care. The study targeted to investigate non-quantifiable aspects, including participants’ attitudes and concepts regarding medical care. According to Busetto, Wick & Gumbinger (2020), qualitative research methods are appropriate for answering the why questions and studying the nature of phenomena. Also, qualitative research methods are vital in assessing perspectives of the studied phenomena.

In the third article, Factors influencing hand hygiene practice of nursing students: A Descriptive, mixed-methods Study,” Zimmerman et al. (2020) conducted multi-method research to explore theoretical knowledge of infection prevention and control (IPC) of nursing students and nursing students and clinical facilitators’ perceptions of factors influencing these practices during clinical placements. According to Wasti et al. (2022), mixed-methods research balances qualitative and quantitative methods to answer the why and how questions and provide more robust inferences about the studied research question or phenomenon.

Description of the Characteristics Associated with the Design of Each Article

In the quantitative study, Cheng et al. (2018) adopted a time series quasi-experimental study design. The researchers used the “Scale of Satisfaction with the Mental Health Home Visit Service of the patients” to explore pre-and-post intervention levels of patients’ satisfaction with various mental health visit services. Other elements of a quantitative design applied in the study include purposive sampling and assigning participants to experimental and control groups. On the other hand, Gilad et al. (2020) applied various aspects of a qualitative study, including semi-structured in-depth interviews and a combination of open-ended and closed questions to obtain insights from staff members and patients in a dialysis unit. These strategies are consistent with the need to explore patients’ and staff members’ thoughts and attitudes regarding the role and process of medication use.

Finally, Zimmerman et al. (2020) applied elements of quantitative and qualitative research Designs, including a non-probability purposive sampling of all Year 1, 2, and 3 nursing students enrolled in the Bachelor of Nursing Degree at an Australian University, memos to document researchers’ thoughts, feelings, and reflections, an anonymous paper-based validated questionnaire, and semi-structured interviews to assess facilitators’ experiences and perceptions nursing students’ IPC practice during clinical placement.

Description of the Statistical Analysis Associated with the Method and Design of Each Article

Cheng et al. (2018) statistically analyzed data using SSPS Version 2.0 and identified statistical significance when p<0.05. They described clinical status, demographic, and satisfaction scores using various measures, including standard deviation, mean, and percentage (Cheng et al., 2018). Further, the researchers assessed inter-group differences in demographics, clinical status, and satisfaction scores using pre-tests and t-tests. Finally, researchers used a Chi-square test to examine qualitative variables.

Conversely, Gilad et al. (2020) did not statistically analyze the participants’ responses. Instead, the researchers categorized responses in the “Initial Framework” template that comprised various themes, including the awareness milestone, the perception milestone, acceptance, and the assistant axis. Other themes that informed the data analysis process included physicians’ perceptions of acting as family practitioners and working with the nursing staff and patients.

Finally, Zimmerman et al. (2020) conducted various statistical analyses consistent with the study design. Firstly, the researchers used Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 23 (IBM, Chicago, IL, USA) to statistically analyze data. They presented categorical variables as counts (percentages) and continuous variables by medians and interquartile ranges. Further, researchers used Chi-squared (x²) statistics to calculate dependence among categorical variables. They established a statistical significance at p≤0.05. Regarding qualitative data analysis strategies, Zimmerman et al. (2020) used themes and memos to document researchers’ thoughts, feelings, and reflections and to record analytical decision-making. The themes that informed qualitative data collection include understanding the workplace culture, students’ modeling local behavior, enhancing awareness and consolidating knowledge for good practice, adjusting to the reality of practice, and availing and accessing additional hand hygiene resources.

The Reliability and Validity Issues of Each Methodology and Design

Research reliability and validity entail the magnitude of the effect of the studied interventions and the consideration of whether the research findings emanated from sound scientific methods (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2019). In a quantitative study, reliability and validity issues include the strength of association between variables, measures of clinical significance, precision in measuring effectiveness, and the presence or absence of biases. Cheng et al. (2018) ensured the study’s reliability and validity by randomly assigning participants to the experimental and control group and adopting sound statistical analysis instruments, including pre-tests and t-tests.

For qualitative studies, reliability and validity issues include comprehensive documentation of researchers’ actions, adequacy of the databases, transferability of research findings, dependability, and the consistency of findings across time (Melnyk & Fineout-Overholt, 2019). Gilad et al. (2020) ensured the validity and reliability of the study by basing research methods on the grounded theory approach, conducting interviews in quiet settings, documenting interview transcripts, and using themes and categories to inform data collection, analysis, and presentation.

Like qualitative and quantitative research methods, reliable and valid mixed-method studies should demonstrate the accuracy and consistency of measures, the dependability and transferability of research findings, and the accuracy of the results. Zimmerman et al. (2020) used an anonymous paper-based questionnaire, semi-structured interviews, and up-to-date statistical analyses using SPSS Version 23. Also, researchers used five themes to inform data collection and presentation. The study’s findings contained measures of statistical significance (p values) to evaluate relationships between categorical variables. These strategies contributed to the study’s validity and reliability.

Summary

Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method studies have different characteristics, including statistical analysis instruments and data collection methodologies. As evident in the three reviewed articles, quantitative studies are often descriptive and entail quantifiable data. On the other hand, qualitative research methods focus on describing phenomena and answering the why questions using non-quantifiable data, including attitudes, perceptions, and views. Finally, mixed-methods research studies capitalize on the strengths of quantitative and qualitative research paradigms by adopting quantitative and qualitative research elements, including data collection and analysis tools. The effectiveness of each research method depends on the research questions, researchers’ preferences, and research objectives.

 

References

Busetto, L., Wick, W., & Gumbinger, C. (2020). How to use and assess qualitative research methods. Neurological Research and Practice, 2(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-020-00059-z

Cheng, J.-F., Huang, X.-Y., Lin, M.-C., Wang, Y.-H., & Yeh, T.-P. (2018). A mental health home visit service partnership intervention on improving patients’ satisfaction. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 32(4), 610–616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2018.03.010

Gilad, L., Haviv, Y. S., Cohen-Glickman, I., Chinitz, D., & Cohen, M. J. (2020). Chronic drug treatment among hemodialysis patients: A qualitative study of patients, nursing and medical staff attitudes and approaches. BMC Nephrology, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12882-020-01900-y

Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2019). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Wolters Kluwer Health.

Scholtz, S. E., de Klerk, W., & de Beer, L. T. (2020). The use of research methods in psychological research: A systematized review. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2020.00001

Wasti, S. P., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Sathian, B., & Banerjee, I. (2022). The growing importance of mixed-methods research in health. Nepal Journal of Epidemiology, 12(1), 1175–1178. NCBI. https://doi.org/10.3126/nje.v12i1.43633

Zimmerman, P.-A. P., Sladdin, I., Shaban, R. Z., Gilbert, J., & Brown, L. (2020). Factors influencing hand hygiene practice of nursing students: A descriptive, mixed-methods study. Nurse Education in Practice, 44, 102746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2020.102746

 

Appendix: Comparison Table of Methods and Designs

 

APA Reference (Include the GCU permalink or working link used to access the article.)	Research Methodology and Design	Setting/Sample Setting characteristics Sampling type (e.g., convenience, purposive, systematic) Number of participants	Instrumentation ·         Identify the instrument ·         Number of questions and how they are answered (e.g., open-ended, multiple choice, Likert scale) ·         Include how the data was collected.	Reliability Reliability type (e.g., interrater, test-retest, internal)   Psychometric data (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha)	Validity Validity type (e.g., construct, content, face) Psychometric data (e.g., sensitivity, specificity)	Levels of Measurement (Identify independent and dependent variables and the associated levels of measurements.)	Data Analysis ·         Statistical significance ·         Analysis test used
Cheng, J.-F., Huang, X.-Y., Lin, M.-C., Wang, Y.-H., & Yeh, T.-P. (2018). A mental health home visit service partnership intervention on improving patients’ satisfaction. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 32(4), 610–616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2018.03.010	Quasi-experimental, quantitative design.	The study involved 240 participants (120 in the experimental and 120 in the control group). The setting of the study was a psychiatric hospital providing home visits. The study adopted purposive sampling.	Data collection involved a scale of 26 items on a 5-point Likert scale. The researchers used the “Scale of Satisfaction with the Mental Health Home Visit Service of the Patients” to measure patients’ satisfaction with the mental health home visit service. Pre-tests and t-tests to evaluate inter-group differences in demographics, clinical status, and satisfaction.	One pre-test (one week before the intervention) and two post-tests (six and 12 months after the intervention). The statistical significance was at p<0.05. Cronbach’s Alpha=0.93	Each question’s item-level content validity index (I-CVI) was >0.83. The Scale-level content validity index (S-VI) was 0.83. When I-CVI and S-VI are >0.8, it is valid to argue that the questionnaire possesses good content validity.	The independent variables in the study were the demographic and clinical status of subjects and partnership intervention. The dependent variables were patients’ satisfaction with home visits. The study revealed a significant difference in post-intervention patient satisfaction with regular home visits between the intervention and control groups (p≤0.001). Sixteen satisfaction item scores in the experimental groups were significantly higher than in the control group.	Statistical significance was set up at p<0.05. Pre-tests and t-tests were used to assess and analyze inter-group differences before and after intervention.
Gilad, L., Haviv, Y. S., Cohen-Glickman, I., Chinitz, D., & Cohen, M. J. (2020). Chronic drug treatment among hemodialysis patients: A qualitative study of patients, nursing and medical staff attitudes and approaches. BMC Nephrology, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12882-020-01900-y	Qualitative research based on the grounded theory approach.	The study involved 78 participants (8 physicians, 20 nurses, and 50 patients). All the physicians worked in the dialysis units affiliated with the Hadassah Medical Hospital in Jerusalem, Israel. There were no inclusion or exclusion criteria for selecting participants.	The primary data collection methods involved semi-structured in-depth interviews and a combination of open-ended and closed questions. The researchers analyzed participants’ responses using themes consistent with the research objectives. Researchers analyzed data using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) Version alongside five themes for analyzing semi-structured interview transcripts.	The study did not involve pre-and post-tests. However, researchers used themes to analyze and categorize qualitative data.	The research does not include validity measures, including content and construct validity.	The study’s dependent variables were participants’ concepts and attitudes regarding medication care. The research did not include many independent variables because it is non-interventional. However, the patient’s physiological conditions represented the independent variable. The study revealed that patients’ physiological conditions affected their perceptions and attitudes regarding medication care.	No thresholds for statistical significance since it was a qualitative study. The researchers used perception, acceptance, and assistance axis themes to analyze and present findings.
Zimmerman, P.-A. P., Sladdin, I., Shaban, R. Z., Gilbert, J., & Brown, L. (2020). Factors influencing hand hygiene practice of nursing students: A descriptive, mixed-methods study. Nurse Education in Practice, 44, 102746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2020.102746	A two-phase descriptive, mixed-method design.	The study involved 930 nursing students enrolled in an Australian university’s Bachelor of Nursing degree. The university offers nursing students with infection prevention and control (IPC) education. Participants volunteered to participate in the study.	Researchers used anonymous questionnaires and information sheets to obtain information from participants.	The statistical significance was set up at p≤0.05. The researchers used Fisher’s Exact Test when more than 20% of cells had expected counts less than 5. Five themes informed qualitative data collection, analysis, and presentation.	Although the researchers asked 11 multiple-choice questions, they did not establish the content, face, or construct validity.	The independent variables in the study were students’ characteristics, including age, gender, how they entered the degree, and previous working experience in healthcare. On the other hand, the dependent variables were students’ infection prevention and control practices. The study revealed that clinical staff’s time constraints, attitudes, and behaviors could influence students’ IPC practice.	The researchers set the statistical significance at p≤0.05. They conducted statistical analyses using SPSS Version 23. Qualitative data analysis tools included five themes; understanding the workplace culture, students’ modeling local behavior, awareness and consolidated knowledge for good practice, adjusting to the reality of practice, and accessing additional hand hygiene resources.