Published 7 August 2008, doi:10.1136/bmj.39602.690162.47
Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a567

Practice

Qualitative Research

Grounded theory, mixed methods, and action research

¹ SickKids Learning Institute and Department of Paediatrics and Wilson Centre for Research in Education, University of Toronto, 200 Elizabeth Street, Eaton South 1-565, Toronto, ON, Canada M5G 2C4 , ² Department of Psychiatry and Wilson Centre for Research in Education, University of Toronto, ³ Department of Medicine, University of Toronto

Related to doi: , 10.1136/bmj.a288doi: , 10.1136/bmj.a1020doi: , 10.1136/bmj.a879doi: , 10.1136/bmj.a949doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1035

These commonly used methods are appropriate for particular research questions and contexts

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Qualitative research includes a variety of methodological approaches with different disciplinary origins and tools. This article discusses three commonly used approaches: grounded theory, mixed methods, and action research. It provides background for those who will encounter these methodologies in their reading rather than instructions for carrying out such research. We describe the appropriate uses, key characteristics, and features of rigour of each approach.

Grounded theory was developed by Glaser and Strauss.[1] Its main thrust is to generate theories regarding social phenomena: that is, to develop higher level understanding that is "grounded" in, or derived from, a systematic analysis of data. Grounded theory is appropriate when the study of social interactions or experiences aims to explain a process, not to test or verify an existing theory. Researchers approach the question with disciplinary interests, background assumptions (sometimes called "sensitising concepts"[2]) and an acquaintance with the literature in the domain, but they neither . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Vulnerability and access to care for South Asian Sikh and Muslim patients with life limiting illness in Scotland: prospective longitudinal qualitative study

Allison Worth, Tasneem Irshad, Raj Bhopal, Duncan Brown, Julia Lawton, Elizabeth Grant, Scott Murray, Marilyn Kendall, James Adam, Rafik Gardee, and Aziz Sheikh
BMJ 2009 338: b183. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Qualitative research methodologies: ethnography

Scott Reeves, Ayelet Kuper, and Brian David Hodges
BMJ 2008 337: a1020. [Extract] [Full Text]

Critically appraising qualitative research

Ayelet Kuper, Lorelei Lingard, and Wendy Levinson
BMJ 2008 337: a1035. [Extract] [Full Text]

An introduction to reading and appraising qualitative research

Ayelet Kuper, Scott Reeves, and Wendy Levinson
BMJ 2008 337: a288. [Extract] [Full Text]

Discourse analysis

Brian David Hodges, Ayelet Kuper, and Scott Reeves
BMJ 2008 337: a879. [Extract] [Full Text]

Why use theories in qualitative research?

Scott Reeves, Mathieu Albert, Ayelet Kuper, and Brian David Hodges
BMJ 2008 337: a949. [Extract] [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Pope, C., Mays, N. (2009). Critical reflections on the rise of qualitative research. BMJ 339: b3425-b3425 [Full text]  
• Worth, A., Irshad, T., Bhopal, R., Brown, D., Lawton, J., Grant, E., Murray, S., Kendall, M., Adam, J., Gardee, R., Sheikh, A. (2009). Vulnerability and access to care for South Asian Sikh and Muslim patients with life limiting illness in Scotland: prospective longitudinal qualitative study. BMJ 338: b183-b183 [Abstract] [Full text]  

Online poll

Find out more >>