The objective of this study is to determine the health risks associated with early elective delivery as a primary nursing problem in the United States. Therefore, the research question is: What are the health risks related to early elective delivery?
The success of the study will depend on the ability of the researcher to gather the information that accounts for the experience of individual participants. The researcher should bring together the members and establish an environment that encourages spontaneous expression. Therefore, the study will use a focus group to gather information. The focus group technique is associated with numerous advantages and disadvantages. According to Krueger and Casey (2015), the method facilitates the collection of adequate data within a short period. The Focus group method is dynamic. Hence, the researcher can modify the topic based on the mood of participants, thus gathering adequate information. Moreover, the researcher can make a clarification in areas that he/she does not understand. The Focus group promotes interaction among the participants. Krueger and Casey (2015) hold, “The group dynamics can generate new thinking about a topic, which will result in a much more in-depth discussion” (p. 34).
One of the weaknesses of the focus group is that the findings may be biased (Krueger & Casey, 2015). The dominant participants may influence their colleagues resulting in biased results. Nevertheless, the researcher may moderate the session to prevent biases. Krueger and Casey (2015) claim that it is difficult to gather accurate information through a focus group. Some participants may be unwilling to share accurate information regarding the topic of discussion.
The researcher will use a mixed-method to guarantee the accuracy of the results. The mixed-method constitutes qualitative and quantitative data. It facilitates the application of a convergent design. Fetters, Curry, and Creswell (2013) allege, “Mixed method enables researchers to assess information using parallel constructs for both types of data” (p. 2139). It also allows investigators to analyze qualitative and quantitative data separately. They later conduct a side-by-side contrast of the findings, which enables the researcher to convert qualitative information into quantitative results. The collection of qualitative and quantitative data helps the researcher to authenticate the result of each data set (Fetters et al., 2013). The qualitative data collected through mixed-method contributes to exploring quantitative results. Besides, it facilitates an in-depth analysis of quantitative findings. Gail (2013) argues, “Findings from instrument data about costs can be studied further with qualitative focus groups to understand better how the personal experiences of individuals match up to the instrument results” (p. 118).
Challenges in Using Mixed Methods
The mixed-method is quite challenging, especially when applied to assess composite interventions. Gail (2013) argues that the mixed method complicates data evaluation. Studies that use mixed methods are difficult to organize and implement. They require “careful planning to describe all aspects of research, including the study sample for qualitative and quantitative portions” (Halcomb & Hickman, 2014, p. 44). It would be difficult to use the mixed method without depending on a multidisciplinary team of pollsters. Mostly, it is hard for one to assemble a team of investigators who are comfortable with both quantitative and qualitative analysis. Vankatesh, Brown, and Bala (2013) argue that it is hard for researchers to guarantee the quality of individual constituents of mixed methods since each method has to stick to its principles. Mixed methods studies involve a lot of activities. Hence, the researchers require ensuring that they have all the requisite resources. Besides, the time needed to conduct mixed methods researchers is higher than that of a single method study.
Fetters, M., Curry, L., & Creswell, J. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs – Principles and practices. Health Services Research, 48(6), 2134-2156.
Gail, C. (2013). Demystifying mixed methods research design: A review of the literature. Mevlana International Journal of Education (MIJE), 3(2), 112-122.
Halcomb, E., & Hickman, L. (2014). Mixed methods research. Nursing Standards, 29(32), 41-47.
Krueger, R., & Casey, M. (2015). Focus group: A practical guide for applied research. New Delhi, India: Sage Publications.
Vankatesh, V., Brown, S., & Bala, H. (2013). Bridging the qualitative-quantitative divide: Guidelines for conducting mixed methods research in information systems. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 37(1), 21-54.