Three mixed methods designs
Slide 1Mixed methods research systematically integrates quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis, to provide a more comprehensive understanding than either approach alone.
What makes a study mixed methods?
Numbers tell us what and how much; qualitative insight tells us why and how
Two parallel studies stapled together in the discussion section are not enough
Integration creates insights neither strand alone could provide
Slide 2Numbers can tell us what and how much, but we often need qualitative insight to understand why and how. Mixed methods research isn't just doing a quantitative study and a qualitative study in parallel and stapling them together in the discussion section, though I've seen people try. True mixed methods involves integration: bringing the qualitative and quantitative strands together in ways that create insights neither strand alone could provide.
Three basic designs, which differ in timing and priority
They differ in
Which method is emphasized
Slide 3Mixed methods designs vary in complexity, but three basic designs cover most situations you'll encounter. They differ in timing, which method comes first, and in priority, which method is emphasized. Think of them as blueprints for how we'll structure a study: convergent, explanatory sequential, and exploratory sequential.
Convergent design
Collect both strands at the same time, analyze separately, then compare
Quantitative and qualitative data collected in the same period
Each strand analyzed independently, keeping its integrity
Findings brought together to see where they converge and diverge
Slide 4In a convergent design, we collect quantitative and qualitative data simultaneously, or close to it, analyze each separately, then bring the results together to compare and contrast them. It's like running two parallel investigations of the same phenomenon, then merging them to see where they converge and where they diverge. We choose it when we want to validate or corroborate findings across methods, or when we want different but complementary data about the same phenomenon.
Convergent design
Joint displays are where integration happens
Tables or matrices putting both strands side by side
Convergence: both strands support the same conclusion
Divergence: the strands suggest different conclusions
Expansion: one strand deepens understanding of the other
Slide 5Integration happens in joint displays: tables, matrices, or visual displays that bring the quantitative and qualitative findings side by side for direct comparison. Then we look for convergence, where both strands support the same conclusion, divergence, where they suggest different conclusions, and expansion, where one strand provides deeper understanding of patterns identified in the other.
Baatz et al., 2024
Coverage data and stakeholder views on vaccination governance in Syria
Quantitative vaccination coverage data
Collected alongside 14 key informant interviews and observations
Joint displays compared coverage data with reports of governance effectiveness
Slide 6The vaccination governance study in northwest Syria from our last video used a convergent approach. The researchers collected quantitative vaccination coverage data while simultaneously conducting 14 key informant interviews and observations about governance processes. Integration happened when they created joint displays comparing vaccination coverage data against stakeholder reports of governance effectiveness.
Baatz et al., 2024
Where the two strands disagreed
Stakeholders perceived the program as effective
Quantitative records lacked demographic data
And relied heavily on paper-based systems
Slide 7The joint displays revealed crucial discrepancies. Despite positive stakeholder perceptions of program effectiveness, the quantitative records revealed a lack of demographic data and an over-reliance on paper-based systems. This divergence prompted deeper investigation that neither strand alone would have revealed.
Explanatory sequential design
Quantitative results first, then qualitative work to explain them
The quantitative phase identifies patterns, associations or outcomes
The qualitative phase is designed to explain why those patterns exist
Useful for surprising findings, group differences and outliers
Slide 8In an explanatory sequential design, we start with quantitative data collection and analysis, then use qualitative methods to explain or elaborate on the quantitative findings. The quantitative phase identifies patterns, associations, or outcomes. The qualitative phase explores why those patterns exist or how the mechanisms work. We choose it when we have quantitative results that need explanation, like surprising findings, significant differences between groups, or outlier cases.
Mulugeta et al., 2024
Perioperative care in three teaching hospitals in southern Ethiopia
Specialist workforce of 0.58 per 100,000 population; 115 procedures per 100,000
Blood products available only 25 to 50% of the time
Perioperative protocols used in just 1 to 25% of cases
Over 90% of patients lacked health insurance
Slide 9A study of perioperative care in three teaching hospitals in southern Ethiopia is a clean example. The quantitative phase used the WHO and Harvard Surgical Assessment Tool to measure capacity across five domains. The survey identified specific gaps. The surgical, obstetric, and anesthesia specialist workforce was just 0.58 per 100,000 population. Blood products were available only 25 to 50 percent of the time, and perioperative management protocols were used in just 1 to 25 percent of cases.
Mulugeta et al., 2024
What twenty clinicians said about those gaps
A poor patient-safety culture and fragmented communication
Quality-improvement projects that produced "no tangible change"
Blood scarcity downstream of declining donations and unresolved national policy
Slide 10These numbers raised the obvious question: why? Twenty semi-structured interviews with surgeons, anesthetists, and nurses formed the qualitative second phase. Protocols were underused, and clinicians also described a poor patient-safety culture, fragmented interprofessional communication, and frustration that repeated quality-improvement projects produced no tangible change. Blood scarcity was a logistics failure and also a downstream effect of declining donations, broken collection practices, and unresolved national-level policy issues.
Mulugeta et al., 2024
Three themes the survey instrument could not have produced
The influence of national governance
Slide 11Three themes emerged that the survey instrument could not have produced at all: the influence of national governance, sociopolitical turmoil, and global market volatility on local perioperative care. The team integrated the two strands through a joint display table, mapping each quantitative finding alongside the qualitative themes that explained it.
Exploratory sequential design
Qualitative exploration first, then quantitative measurement
The qualitative phase identifies variables or develops measures
The quantitative phase tests them in a larger sample
Valuable where Western-developed measures may not apply
Slide 12In an exploratory sequential design, we start with qualitative exploration to identify important variables, develop measures, or understand a phenomenon, then follow with quantitative data collection to test patterns or generalize to a larger population. It's particularly valuable in global health research, where Western-developed measures or theories may not apply in different cultural contexts.
Green et al., 2018
Would screening tools from high-income settings miss how Kenyan women describe distress?
A perinatal depression screening tool developed in rural Kenya
Existing tools like the EPDS and PHQ-9 were designed elsewhere
Slide 13My team developed a perinatal depression screening tool in rural Kenya using an exploratory sequential design. We started with the suspicion that screening instruments designed in high-income settings, like the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale and the PHQ-9, might miss how Kenyan women actually describe perinatal distress.
Green et al., 2018
From 171 cover terms to a 60-item pool
365 items from 17 existing screening tools, yielding 171 unique cover terms
Free-listing and card-sorting groups of women and community health volunteers in Bungoma
Local idioms of distress that no Western tool included
Eleven Kenyan mental health professionals approved a 60-item blended pool
Slide 14We assembled 365 items from 17 existing screening tools and pulled out 171 unique cover terms. Groups of pregnant women and new mothers, and groups of community health volunteers in Bungoma County, ranked which of those terms matched local experience, and they generated new local idioms of distress that no Western tool included. A panel of eleven Kenyan mental health professionals reviewed the results and signed off on a blended pool of 60 items.
Green et al., 2018
Validating the pool against a clinical interview
193 pregnant women and new mothers completed all three scales
Plus a structured clinical interview by trained Kenyan counselors
More than 600,000 possible scale combinations narrowed the pool to 9 items
Slide 15The quantitative phase then validated this blended tool against a gold standard. A random sample of 193 pregnant women and new mothers completed the Edinburgh scale, the PHQ-9, and the new pool of 60 items, along with a structured clinical interview administered by trained Kenyan counselors. Item analysis and combinatorial optimization across more than 600,000 possible scale combinations narrowed the pool to a Perinatal Depression Screening tool with just 9 items. We saw this tool's cutoff in the measurement chapter.
Green et al., 2018
Sensitivity and specificity in this population
Slide 16In this population, the new tool outperformed both established scales, with sensitivity and specificity of 0.90 and 0.90, compared to 0.70 and 0.72 for the Edinburgh scale and 0.70 and 0.73 for the PHQ-9. The qualitative phase ensured the tool was grounded in how Kenyan women actually talk about distress, and the quantitative phase confirmed that grounding paid off in diagnostic accuracy.
Integration is the defining feature of mixed methods
How will the strands be brought together?
What insights emerge that separate analyses could not produce?
If there is no answer, it may be two separate studies
Slide 17The defining feature of mixed methods is integrating qualitative and quantitative research, and merely doing both isn't enough. Ask yourself: how will I bring these strands together? What insights emerge from integration that couldn't emerge from separate analyses? If you can't answer these questions, maybe you're doing two separate studies rather than true mixed methods.
Data transformation, such as quantifying qualitative themes
Narrative weaving that connects findings across strands
Meta-inferences drawing on both strands
Slide 18Integration happens through joint displays; through data transformation, converting one type of data to the other; through narrative weaving, writing that explicitly connects findings across strands; and through meta-inferences, interpretations that draw on both quantitative and qualitative insights. The best mixed methods studies make integration explicit and central.
Different questions call for different designs
Whether an intervention works: randomized trials
How it works: qualitative inquiry into mechanisms
Whether it will work in a new context: mixed methods implementation research
How to adapt it: participatory approaches
Slide 19Global health faces complex challenges that do not fit neatly into single methodological boxes. Understanding whether an intervention works calls for randomized trials. Understanding how it works calls for qualitative inquiry into mechanisms. Understanding whether it will work in a new context calls for mixed methods implementation research. And understanding how to adapt it calls for participatory approaches that center community knowledge.
In Closing
Let the question lead
Sometimes quantitative, sometimes qualitative, often mixed methods
Evidence that is rigorous, contextually grounded and useful for improving health
Slide 20The most interesting global health research is increasingly comfortable moving across these approaches, as a strength and not as a compromise. As you develop your own work, resist the pressure to pick one methodological camp and stick to it. Let the question lead. Sometimes that means quantitative work, sometimes qualitative, often mixed methods, and increasingly participatory approaches that share research power with communities. The goal is evidence that is rigorous, contextually grounded, and useful for improving health and advancing equity.