Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Nihon Eiseigaku Zasshi. 2011 Jan;66(1):83-94.

[Reconstituting evaluation methods based on both qualitative and quantitative paradigms].

[Article in Japanese]

Author information

  • 1Department of Healthcare Quality Assessment, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Japan. hiroaki.miyata@gmail.com

Abstract

Debate about the relationship between quantitative and qualitative paradigms is often muddled and confusing and the clutter of terms and arguments has resulted in the concepts becoming obscure and unrecognizable. In this study we conducted content analysis regarding evaluation methods of qualitative healthcare research. We extracted descriptions on four types of evaluation paradigm (validity/credibility, reliability/credibility, objectivity/confirmability, and generalizability/transferability), and classified them into subcategories. In quantitative research, there has been many evaluation methods based on qualitative paradigms, and vice versa. Thus, it might not be useful to consider evaluation methods of qualitative paradigm are isolated from those of quantitative methods. Choosing practical evaluation methods based on the situation and prior conditions of each study is an important approach for researchers.

PMID:
21358139
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for J-STAGE, Japan Science and Technology Information Aggregator, Electronic
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk