Mixed methodology: A pragmatic approach to investigating complexity in radiography research.

Objectives

Mixed methodology research designs are used to investigate and evaluate complexity in healthcare, yet the integration or mixing of qualitative and quantitative data in these studies is still considered a major methodological challenge. This article is the first to review the utilisation of mixed methods studies in radiography, with a particular emphasis on research design and evidence of integration. The paper presents a contemporary case study to explore advanced framework integration and concludes with recommendations for radiography mixed methods researchers.

Key findings

A search of three radiography journals (2013-2025) identified 26 mixed methods studies, mainly focusing on workforce research questions. At design level, only 14 studies were explicit about integration. Most studies were two-phase designs, with five studies deploying advanced frameworks. Convergent and explanatory sequential designs were prevalent, with data collection primarily through surveys, interviews and focus groups. Integration at the methods and reporting levels was rarely documented. The majority adopted a narrative integration reporting style, though few explicitly discussed qualitative and quantitative findings together. Only three articles explicitly defined meta-inferences, the new insights that emerge from the mixing of qualitative and quantitative data.

Conclusion

The adoption of mixed methodologies in radiography is limited but is increasingly used to investigate complex workforce research questions. While the individual quantitative and qualitative components are invariably well-described, a lack of meaningful integration potentially compromises the attainment of the true benefits of a mixed methods design.

Implications for practice

At the onset of the study, researchers are advised to justify the mixed methods design, clearly articulating the methods of integration at all study stages. Researchers should utilise appropriate tools that encourage reporting of quality criteria to ensure trustworthiness.