ArticlePrevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research2014
Using mixed methods effectively in prevention science: designs, procedures, and examples.
Article in Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the Safe Steps for De-escalation: A protocol for a mixed concurrent control study in acute mental health units.PloS one · 2025Article
- Promoting health and social equity through family navigation to prevention and early intervention services: a proof of concept study.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Piloting an evidence-based intervention for HIV prevention among street youth in Eldoret, Kenya.International journal of public health · 2020Article
- A Primer on Mixed Methods for Pediatric Researchers.Journal of pediatric psychology · 2019Article
- Integrating mixed methods in health services and delivery system research.Health services research · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is growing interest in using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods to generate evidence about the effectiveness of health prevention, services, and intervention programs. With the emerging importance of mixed methods research across the social and health sciences, there has been an increased recognition of the value of using mixed methods for addressing research questions in different disciplines. We illustrate the mixed methods approach in prevention research, showing design procedures used in several published research articles. In this paper, we focused on two commonly used mixed methods designs: concurrent and sequential mixed methods designs. We discuss the types of mixed methods designs, the reasons for, and advantages of using a particular type of design, and the procedures of qualitative and quantitative data collection and integration. The studies reviewed in this paper show that the essence of qualitative research is to explore complex dynamic phenomena in prevention science, and the advantage of using mixed methods is that quantitative data can yield generalizable results and qualitative data can provide extensive insights. However, the emphasis of methodological rigor in a mixed methods application also requires considerable expertise in both qualitative and quantitative methods. Besides the necessary skills and effective interdisciplinary collaboration, this combined approach also requires an open-mindedness and reflection from the involved researchers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23801237What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.