ArticleBMC medical research methodology2018
Participatory action research, mixed methods, and research teams: learning from philosophically juxtaposed methodologies for optimal research outcomes.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- PAtient-Centric epilepsy clinical trIal model For Improved health outcomes using Cannabidiol (PACIFIC study)-a methodology for developing patient-centred clinical trials in rare epilepsy syndromes.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Perspective on patient and non-academic partner engagement for the responsible integration of large language models in health chatbots.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Advancing mixed methods in mental health research.BMJ mental health · 2025Article
- Considerations for adapting digital competencies and training approaches to the public health workforce: an interpretive description of practitioners' perspectives in Canada.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Commitments for Ethically Responsible Sourcing, Use, and Reuse of Patient Data in the Digital Age: Cocreation Process.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Model for enhancing the research conducted by the university medical staff: Participatory action research.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Community participation for reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health: insights from the design and implementation of the BornFyne-prenatal management system digital platform in Cameroon.Frontiers in digital health · 2023Article
- Bridging community and clinic through digital health: Community-based adaptation of a mobile phone-based heart failure program for remote communities in Uganda.BMC digital health · 2023Article
- Using a mixed method to identify communication skills training priorities for Chinese general practitioners in diabetes care.BMC primary care · 2022Review
- Promoting Mental Health Help-Seeking Behaviors by Mental Health Literacy Interventions in Secondary Education? Needs and Perspectives of Adolescents and Educational Professionals.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- A study on improving nursing clinical competencies in a surgical department: A participatory action research.Nursing open · 2020Article
- Researching social innovation: is the tail wagging the dog?Infectious diseases of poverty · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWorkplace health interventions incorporating qualitative and quantitative components (mixed methods) within a Participatory Action Research approach can increase understanding of contextual issues ensuring realistic interventions which influence health behaviour. Mixed methods research teams, however, face a variety of challenges at the methodological and expertise levels when designing actions and interventions. Addressing these challenges can improve the team's functionality and lead to higher quality health outcomes. In this paper we reflect on the data collection, implementation and data analysis phases of a mixed methods workplace health promotion project and discuss the challenges which arose within our multidisciplinary team.
methodsThis project used mixed methods within a Participatory Action Research approach to address workers' sun safety behaviours in 14 outdoor workplaces in Queensland, Australia, and elucidate why certain measures succeeded (or failed) at the worker and management level. The project integrated qualitative methods such as policy analysis and interviews, with a range of quantitative methods - including worker surveys, ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure measurement, and implementation cost analyses.
resultsThe research team found the integration of qualitative and quantitative analyses within the Participatory Action Research process to be challenging and a cause of tensions. This had a negative impact on the data analysis process and reporting of results, and the complexity of qualitative analysis was not truly understood by the quantitative team. Once all researchers recognised qualitative and quantitative data would be equally beneficial to the Participatory Action Research process, methodological bias was overcome to a degree to which the team could work cooperatively.
conclusionsMixed methods within a Participatory Action Research approach may allow a research team to discuss, reflect and learn from each other, resulting in broadened perspectives beyond the scope of any single research methodology. However, cohesive and supportive teams take constant work and adjustment under this approach, as knowledge and understanding is gained and shared. It is important researchers are cognisant of, and learn from, potential tensions within research teams due to juxtaposed philosophies, methodologies and experiences, if the team is to function efficiently and positive outcomes are to be achieved.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.