Informed Reflections on Types of Health Research

Qualitative and Quantitative Research Summary

There is a need for research in the healthcare sector. According to this development, both institutional research programs as well as scientific study publications have attracted a considerable demand.  In the last decade, qualitative research is now mainstream in medical journals. However, initially, they were not accepted as scientific methods of analysis because they only comprised of personal accounts without strong evidence about systematic concerns. Therefore, they only served as anecdotal of research. 

A look into healthcare research shows that there are groundbreaking solutions that often provide for a new means of measurements as well as pattern finding (Broom & Willis, 2013). Take, for instance, research that involves creating a way of measure blood pressure to improve the treatments for both high and low blood pressure. A review of Florence Nightingale reveals that careful measurements of hospital outcomes can make a big difference in healthcare. Presently, the healthcare industry is going through a substantial change in caregiving. 

In quantitative research, there are vast amounts of data available that are mixing with technologies to analyze them thoroughly.  Resultantly, the unique pattern of quantitative analysis is recreating the health care sector. Quantitative analysis is the means of employing complex mathematical or statistical models to analyze data and foresee behavior.  As such, through quantitative data in economics and finance, the current quantitative analysis just became a possibility in healthcare.  According to some research experts, the design of quantitative analysis will help transform the industry according to how people maintain their health and the treatment of the sick.

On other hand, qualitative research is when analyzing from a methodological perspective, if one wants to provide a scientific explanation for any subject in question (Devers & Frankel, 2000). For instance, in the phenomena related to drug addiction, there are many areas of research including epidemiology, clinical pharmacology, and psychiatry. If a researcher needs to comprehend the substance and its implications in an addicted patient, then they will apply qualitative research. Researchers of this subject can be psychologists, psychoanalysts, educators, sociologists, anthropologists, and such (Devers & Frankel, 2000). Nonetheless, it would be a point of interest if healthcare professionals could consider qualitative methods for their studies. It is because they will have the advantage of having a fundamental attitude because of their clinical experience. As a result, they will be in a position to perform rich data collections and make definitive conclusions.

Differences and Similarities

Differences

1. The first difference is that both research methods have different goals, hence the difference in design. Qualitative research is that it is basically about the exploratory study and used to shed light on underlying reasons, motivations, opinions of the subjects (Broom & Willis, 2013). It provides a solution to the problem and helps to develop ideas for quantitive research. In other words, qualitative research builds up a platform for quantitative analysis. As such, qualitative research is also used as a tool by researchers for uncovering trends in the way subjects think and provide their opinion; hence, delves deeper into the problem. The quantitative research study is more structured as opposed to qualitative data collection (Broom & Willis, 2013). The methods include various models of surveys such as online survey, paper survey, kiosk survey, mobile surveys, phone interviews, online polls, one-on-one interviews, and systematic observations (Johnson, & Turner, 2003).
2. Secondly, methods of data collection in qualitative research vary according to techniques- semi-structured and unstructured (Broom & Willis, 2013). Conventional methods in qualitative research are interviews, observations, and focus groups. In quantitative analysis, the method is mainly for quantifying a problem by coming up with numerical data or data that can generate into useable statistics. The research is for quantifying attitudes, behaviors, opinions and other definable variables then collect results from a larger sample (Johnson, & Turner, 2003). The method uses data that is measurable to come up with facts and reveal patterns and behavior in research.

Similarities

1. Firstly, one similarity between the two methods of research are that, in both kinds of research, there is a need for raw data in both (Broom & Willis, 2013). According to the nature of the study, in both, will determine the type of participants. In qualitative research, needs people to take part while in quantitative analysis, relies on numbers from other reliable sources. Both methods of research help to measure the results of data (Broom & Willis, 2013). Qualitative research pays attention to data by expressing through words and actions. Take, for instance, showing people a short film and asking them how they feel about it. If you gather data about how people perceive the film, the counted result is quantitative research. 
2. Another similarity between the two is that in both studies, there is a need for raw data in both. According to the nature of the study, in both, will determine the type of participants. In qualitative research, needs people to take part while in quantitative analysis, relies on numbers from other reliable sources.

Position as a researcher and Discussion about the Most Appropriate Research Method

As a future health researcher, combining both methods of research in a single study is a common phenomenon (Broom & Willis, 2013). There is a notion that there is a separate wedge between qualitative and quantitative analysis in that each belongs to a different paradigm. A closer look into health research shows that there has been an upsurge of interest in the way researchers combine the two methods despite the different terminology (Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, 2009). There is a more significant interest that emerges from various points of views; there are numerous contributions that come with qualitative research in the study of health and illness in healthcare. The qualitative paradigm usually has increased rigor which has made it preferable to researchers and practitioners in the quantitative model. 

Due to the combination of both quantitive and qualitative methods, comes with more profound revelations as opposed to using a single process (Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, 2009). In the public sector, there is an extensive knowledge of the fact that public health problems result from a range of social, economic, and political influences. As a result, there are various epidemiological as well as social science methods employed to research such issues (Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, 2009). Moreover, the legitimacy for the employment of qualitative methods together with quantitative has caused the recognition of the fact that qualitative methods are significant when it comes to random trials that highlight into complex health service interventions. There are works written that shed light on various ways in which qualitative methods are helpful in RCTs. However, there is little information on how such practices can help in enhancing the significance as well as policies for trial findings.

As a researcher, there is a need to pay attention to the fact that research is all about using methods that will produce an understanding of a particular subject (Johnson & Turner, 2003). As such, researchers borrow from different platforms taken from other places through research methods. The plans can incorporate tools such as numbers, personal opinions, insights, random essays, questionnaires, percentage calculation, tables, statistics, and such. Therefore, it is worth noting that all these are a combination of both qualitative and quantitative data.  

One should note that research is about finding answers without denying its definition (Broom & Willis, 2013). As such, they are using both quantitative and qualitative method intensifies the study because it provides both numbers and opinion of the subject.  When one is applying the qualitative methods in health research, they are borrowing from human sciences whereby the study is finding meaning in people’s life (Johnson & Turner, 2003). On the other hand, quantitative research deals with facts, numbers, and data that provide an insight into the designs relevant in healthcare study. Using both methods helps a researcher to understand the phenomena of life from both an opinion’s perspective and a number perspective. By using the two approaches together, helps the researcher to measure the strength of both methodologies.

It is worth noting that research in healthcare is an essential aspect because it helps with providing better healthcare outcomes and also the improvement of overall healthcare. Both qualitative and quantitative research methods have attracted a considerable interest in mainstream media. There is an ongoing debate about which way is superior to another. Since the healthcare sector is delicate, the difference between the two methods holds significant weight. By looking at the differences and similarities between the means and reveals that each has its strength when it comes to research. The qualitative design focusses on people views and such.

On the other hand, the quantitive model looks into the data collected during research to establish facts. However, a closer look at both methods reveals that they complement each other in the analysis. Both are independent models that support the other. Therefore, as a researcher, it is best to combine the two methods to reconcile both numbers and opinions to provide research. The best thing in healthcare research is to use all tools available designs to come up with the best results for a particular subject. As seen, both method are equally useful in healthcare.

References

Broom, A. & Willis, E. (2013). Competing paradigms and health research. In J. Allsop & M. 

Saks (Eds.), Researching health: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods (pp. 16-31). London: Thousand Oaks. Retrieved from http://www.corwin.com/upm-data/13614_02_Saks_ch02.pdf

Devers, K. J., & Frankel, R. M. (2000). Study design in qualitative research–2: Sampling and 

data collection strategies. Education for health, 13(2), 263. file:///C:/Users/X250/Downloads/out%20(3).pdf

Johnson, B., & Turner, L. A. (2003). Data collection strategies in mixed methods 

research. Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, 297-319. file:///C:/Users/X250/Downloads/out%20(1).pdf

Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2009). A typology of mixed methods research 

designs. Quality & quantity, 43(2), 265-275. file:///C:/Users/X250/Downloads/out%20(2).pdf