Dataset Information

Qualitative Comparative Analysis: A Hybrid Method for Identifying Factors Associated with Program Effectiveness.

ABSTRACT: Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) was developed over 25 years ago to bridge the qualitative and quantitative research gap. Upon searching PubMed and the Journal of Mixed Methods Research, this review identified 30 original research studies that utilized QCA. Perceptions that QCA is complex and provides few relative advantages over other methods may be limiting QCA adoption. Thus, to overcome these perceptions, this article demonstrates how to perform QCA using data from fifteen institutions that implemented universal tumor screening (UTS) programs to identify patients at high risk for hereditary colorectal cancer. In this example, QCA revealed a combination of conditions unique to effective UTS programs. Results informed additional research and provided a model for improving patient follow-through after a positive screen.

SUBMITTER: Cragun D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4941817 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Qualitative Comparative Analysis: A Hybrid Method for Identifying Factors Associated with Program Effectiveness.

Cragun Deborah D Pal Tuya T Vadaparampil Susan T ST Baldwin Julie J Hampel Heather H DeBate Rita D RD

Journal of mixed methods research 20150225 3

Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) was developed over 25 years ago to bridge the qualitative and quantitative research gap. Upon searching <i>PubMed</i> and the <i>Journal of Mixed Methods Research</i>, this review identified 30 original research studies that utilized QCA. Perceptions that QCA is complex and provides few relative advantages over other methods may be limiting QCA adoption. Thus, to overcome these perceptions, this article demonstrates how to perform QCA using data from fiftee ...[more]

PMID: 27429602

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAchieving widespread adoption of innovations across health systems remains a challenge. Past efforts have focused on identifying and classifying strategies to actively support innovation spread (replicating an innovation across sites), but we lack an understanding about the mechanisms which such strategies draw on to deliver successful spread outcomes. There is also no established methodology to identify core strategies or mechanisms which could be replicated with fidelity in new contexts when spreading innovations. We aimed to understand which strategies and mechanisms are connected with successful spread using the case of a national medicines optimisation programme in England.MethodsThe study applied a comparative mixed-method case study approach. We compared spread activity in 15 Academic Health Science Networks (AHSN) in England, applied to one innovation case, Transfers of Care Around Medicines (TCAM). We followed two methodological steps: (1) qualitative thematic analysis of primary data collected from 18 interviews with AHSN staff members to identify the strategies and mechanisms and related contextual determinants and (2) Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) combining secondary quantitative data on spread outcome and qualitative themes from step 1 to identify the core strategies and mechanisms.ResultsWe identified six common spread strategy-mechanism constructs that AHSNs applied to spread the TCAM national spread programme: (1) the unique intermediary position of the AHSN as "honest broker" and local networking organisation, (2) the right capacity and position of the spread facilitator, (3) an intersectoral and integrated stakeholder engagement approach, (4) the dynamic marriage of the innovation with local health and care system needs and characteristics, (5) the generation of local evidence, and (6) the timing of TCAM. The QCA resulted in the core strategy/mechanism of a timely start into the national spread programme in combination with the employment of a local, senior pharmacist as an AHSN spread facilitator.ConclusionsBy qualitatively comparing experiences of spreading one innovation across different contexts, we identified common strategies, causal mechanisms, and contextual determinants. The QCA identified one core combination of two strategies/mechanisms. The identification of core strategies/mechanisms and common pre-conditional and mediating contextual determinants of a specific innovation offers spread facilitators and implementers a priority list for tailoring spread activities.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Complex healthcare interventions consist of multiple components which may vary in trials conducted in different populations and contexts. Pooling evidence from trials in a systematic review is challenging because it is unclear which components are needed for effectiveness. The potential is recognised for using recipients' views to explore why some complex interventions are effective and others are not. Methods to maximise this potential are poorly developed. METHODS:We used a novel approach to explore how patients' views may explain the disparity in effectiveness of complex interventions. We used qualitative comparative analysis to explore agreement between qualitative syntheses of data on patients' views and evidence from trialed interventions to increase adherence to treatments. We first populated data matrices to reflect whether the content of each trialed intervention could be matched with suggestions arising from patients' views. We then used qualitative comparative analysis software to identify, by a process of elimination, the smallest number of configurations (patterns) of components that corresponded with patients' suggestions and accounted for whether each intervention was effective or ineffective. RESULTS:We found suggestions by patients were poorly represented in interventions. Qualitative comparative analysis identified particular combinations of components corresponding with patients' suggestions and with whether an intervention was effective or ineffective. Six patterns were identified for an effective and four for an ineffective intervention. Two types of patterns arose for the effective interventions, one being didactic (providing clear information or instruction) and the other interactive (focusing on personal risk factors). CONCLUSIONS:Our analysis highlights how data on patients' views has the potential to identify key components across trials of complex interventions or inform the content of new interventions to be trialed.

Dataset Information

Qualitative Comparative Analysis: A Hybrid Method for Identifying Factors Associated with Program Effectiveness.

Publications

Qualitative Comparative Analysis: A Hybrid Method for Identifying Factors Associated with Program Effectiveness.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets