Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26559730›Full record

ReviewBMC health services research2015

A mixed methods contribution to the study of health public policies: complementarities and difficulties.

Valéry Ridde, Jean-Pierre Olivier de Sardan

Abstract readHistorical ArticleReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC health services research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. [Evidence syntheses in public health: An overview].Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Valéry Ridde
Jean-Pierre Olivier de Sardan

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research CPP 137901
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of mixed methods (combining quantitative and qualitative data) is developing in a variety of forms, especially in the health field. Our own research has adopted this perspective from the outset. We have sought all along to innovate in various ways and especially to develop an equal partnership, in the sense of not allowing any single approach to dominate. After briefly describing mixed methods, in this article we explain and illustrate how we have exploited both qualitative and quantitative methods to answer our research questions, ending with a reflective analysis of our experiment.

Indexed as

Public PolicyResearch DesignBurkina FasoFees, MedicalHealth Services ResearchHistory, 19th CenturyHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyHumansMaliMedical AssistanceNigerOrganizational InnovationQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID26559730
PMCPMC4652477

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.