Research Methods Resource

Designing Research

  1. Jameel B, Majid U*. (2018). Research Fundamentals: Data Collection, Data Analysis, and Ethics. URNCST Journal, 2:4 (1-8). https://doi.org/10.26685/urncst.39
  2. Majid U. (2018). Research Fundamentals: Study Design, Population, and Sample Size. URNCST Journal, 2:1 (1-7). https://doi.org/10.26685/urncst.16
  3. Majid U. (2017). Research Fundamentals: The Research Question, Objectives and Background. URNCST Journal, 1:2 (1-7). https://doi.org/10.26685/urncst.14
  4. Majid U, Kandasamy S. (2020). The Rationales for and Challenges with Employing Arts-based Health Services Research (ABHSR): A Qualitative Systematic Review of Primary Studies. BMJ Medical Humanities. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/medhum-2020-011845
  5. Majid U, Kandasamy S, Ramlakhan J. (2020). How to Design an Arts-Based Health Services Research Study: A Participatory Qualitative Study on the Determinants of Telehealth Adoption in Rural Seniors with Depression. SAGE Research Methods Cases. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781529734874

Qualitative Research

  1. Jameel B, Shaheen S, Majid U*. (2018). Introduction to Qualitative Research for Novice Investigators. URNCST Journal, 2(6): 1-6. https://doi.org/10.26685/urncst.57
  2. Grix, J. (2002). Introducing students to the generic terminology of social research. Politics, 22(3), 175-186.
  3. Greenhalgh, T., Annandale, E., Ashcroft, R., Barlow, J., Black, N., Bleakley, A., … & Checkland, K. (2016). An open letter to The BMJ editors on qualitative research. Bmj, 352, i563.
  4. Loder, E., Groves, T., Schroter, S., Merino, J. G., Weber, W., & Godlee, F. (2016). The BMJ editors respond. Bmj, 352, i1492.

Quality Appraisal

  1. Majid U*, Vanstone M. (2018). Appraising Qualitative Research for Evidence Syntheses: A Compendium of Quality Appraisal Tools. Qualitative Health Research. 28(13): 2115-2131 https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1049732318785358
  2. Giacomini, M. K., Cook, D. J., & Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. (2000). Users’ guides to the medical literature: XXIII. Qualitative research in health care A. Are the results of the study valid?. Jama, 284(3), 357-362.
  3. Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The qualitative report, 8(4), 597-606.
  4. Smith, B. (2018). Generalizability in qualitative research: Misunderstandings, opportunities and recommendations for the sport and exercise sciences. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 10(1), 137-149.

Mixed-Methods Research

  • Collins, K. M., & O’cathain, A. (2009). Introduction: Ten points about mixed methods research to be considered by the novice researcher. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 3(1), 2-7.
  • Bergman, M. M. (2011). The good, the bad, and the ugly in mixed methods research and design. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 5(4): 271-275
  • Small, M. L. (2011). How to conduct a mixed methods study: Recent trends in a rapidly growing literature. Annual review of sociology, 37, 57-86.
  • Pluye, P., & Hong, Q. N. (2014). Combining the power of stories and the power of numbers: mixed methods research and mixed studies reviews. Annual review of public health, 35, 29-45.
  • Ozawa, S., & Pongpirul, K. (2013). 10 best resources on… mixed methods research in health systems. Health policy and planning, 29(3), 323-327.

Implementation Science/Knowledge Translation

  1. Zain S, Majid U. (2018). An Introduction to Knowledge Translation in Healthcare. URNCST Journal. 2(11): 1-5. https://doi.org/10.26685/urncst.67
  2. Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., & Graham, I. (2009). Defining knowledge translation. Cmaj, 181(3-4), 165-168.
  3. Grimshaw, J. M., Eccles, M. P., Lavis, J. N., Hill, S. J., & Squires, J. E. (2012). Knowledge translation of research findings. Implementation science, 7(1), 50.Mitton, C., Adair, C. E., McKenzie, E., Patten, S. B., & Perry, B. W. (2007). Knowledge transfer and exchange: review and synthesis of the literature. The Milbank Quarterly, 85(4), 729-768.
  4. Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J. M., & Graham, I. D. (2011). Knowledge translation is the use of knowledge in health care decision making. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 64(1), 6-10.
  5. Majid U, Kim C, Cako A, Gagliardi ARG*. (2018). Engaging Stakeholders in the Co-Development of Programs or Interventions using Intervention Mapping: A Scoping Review. PLOS One. 13(12): e0209826. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209826
  6. Zain S, Jameel B, Zahid M, Munir M, Kandasamy S, Majid U*. (in press). The Design and Delivery of Maternal Health Interventions in Pakistan: A Scoping Review. Healthcare for Women International.
  7. van Bodegom-Vos, L., Davidoff, F., & Marang-van de Mheen, P. J. (2017). Implementation and de-implementation: two sides of the same coin?. BMJ Qual Saf, 26(6), 495-501.

Evidence Syntheses

Qualitative Evidence Synthesis

  1. Majid U, Weeks L. (2020). Rapid Qualitative Evidence Syntheses (rQES) in Health Technology Assessment: Experiences, Challenges and Lessons. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0266462320000720
  2. Majid U, Zain S, Shaikh R, Jameel B. (2020). Uncommon Methodologies for Conducting Literature Reviews: Part 1 – A Policy Analysis of How Maternal Health Concepts Have Been Framed in Policy Documents of a Low-Income Country. SAGE Research Methods Cases. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781529734867
  3. Soilemezi, D., & Linceviciute, S. (2018). Synthesizing qualitative research: reflections and lessons learnt by two new reviewers. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17(1), 1609406918768014.
  4. Booth, A., Noyes, J., Flemming, K., Gerhardus, A., Wahlster, P., van der Wilt, G. J., … & Rehfuess, E. (2018). Structured methodology review identified seven (RETREAT) criteria for selecting qualitative evidence synthesis approaches. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 99, 41-52.
  5. Dixon‐Woods, M., Fitzpatrick, R., & Roberts, K. (2001). Including qualitative research in systematic reviews: opportunities and problems. Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 7(2), 125-133.

Concept Analysis

  1. Majid U. (2020). Uncommon Methodologies for Conducting Literature Reviews: Part 2 – A Systematic Review and Concept Analysis of the Terms That Depict Tokenism in Patient Engagement. SAGE Research Methods Cases. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781529735017