Critiquing Quantitative, Qualitative, or Mixed Methods Studies

Critiquing Mixed-method and Quantitative Studies
Name:
Institutional Affiliation:
Critiquing Mixed-methods and Quantitative Studies
Introduction
Nursing research is a critical element of the healthcare to assure efficient, quality, and safe patient care. The aspect provides essential knowledge that helps in the nursing practice advancement, leading to improved health of populations. As a result, nurses need to understand the various research methods, for them to know which would yield the best evidence-based approach that can enhance healthcare provision. The paper seeks to evaluate and contrast the mixed-methods and quantitative studies, outline their demerits and merits, and give investigators insights concerning the designs.
Information Comparison
Mixed-methods research refers to a methodology that entails collecting and evaluating data, and incorporates both qualitative and quantitative techniques (Morse & Niehaus, 2009). The study by Sax et al. (2013) concerning the implementation of best practices for infection control in an Intensive Care Unit (ICU) utilizes the mixed research. The investigators used a qualitative approach to evaluate the application process nature of the PROHIBIT CRBSI recommendations. The sample was made of ICU’s in six selected acute care institutions, with data collection from interviews of health agents and providers. Others were obtained from ethnographic observations, photography, and artifact collection. The authors used the grounded theory to undertake data analysis (Sax et al., 2013). The intervention trial utilized the quantitative methodology to generate epidemiological findings. The two techniques enhanced the researcher’s comprehension of the problem and answered the how and why questions on the best infection prevention implementation practice.
In contrast, a quantitative research evaluates a phenomenon using accurate and precise measurements as discussed by Polit and Beck (2012). Zaiton and Taha use the quantitative study in investigating the impact of using the Central Line Bundle (CLB) to reduce Central Line-Associated Blood Stream Infection (CLA-BSI). The investigation was undertaken at the Zagazig University hospital’s ICU. The sample included two groups with the first comprising of 30 caregivers, who offered patient nursing care during injection, caring and ejecting of central lines. The second one was the study group that encompassed 40 intervention patients and 40 as the control part that had been presented with CLB. The data collection entailed the use of devolvement assessment forms, observational checklist, and CLB. The research employed five expertise to validate the tools. Statistical analysis was then carried out on the data using SPSS to generate the conclusions. They concluded that the CLB aids in minimizing CLA-BSI (Zaiton & Taha, 2014).
Advantages and Disadvantages in Mixed-methods and Quantitative Research.
The mixed methodology presents its merits that make it suitable for clinical studies. The technique allows for the in-depth investigation of a problem, in comparison to the single approach. The combination of observation and statistical analysis results in a more comprehensive study. The research by Sax et al. (2013...