Ahtisham Younas, Sergi Fàbregues, Sarah Munce, John W Creswell
{"title":"Framework for types of metainferences in mixed methods research.","authors":"Ahtisham Younas, Sergi Fàbregues, Sarah Munce, John W Creswell","doi":"10.1186/s12874-025-02475-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The generation of metainferences is a core and significant feature of mixed methods research. In recent years, there has been some discussion in the literature about criteria for appraising the quality of metainferences, the processes for generating them, and the critical role that assessing the \"fit\" of quantitative and qualitative data and results plays in this generative process. However, little is known about the types of insights that emerge from generating metainferences. To address this gap, this paper conceptualize and present the types and forms of metainferences that can be generated in MMR studies for guiding future research projects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A critical review of literature sources was conducted, including peer-reviewed articles, book chapters, and research reports. We performed a non-systematic literature search in the Scopus, Web of Science, Ovid, and Google Scholar databases using general phrases such as \"inferences in research\", \"metainferences in mixed methods\", \"inferences in mixed methods research\", and \"inference types\". Additional searches included key methodological journals, such as the Journal of Mixed Methods Research, International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, Methodological Innovations, and the Sage Research Methods database, to locate books, chapters, and peer-reviewed articles that discussed inferences and metainferences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We propose two broad types of metainferences and five sub-types. The broad metainferences are global and specific, and the subtypes include relational, predictive, causal, comparative, and elaborative metainferences. Furthermore, we provide examples of each type of metainference from published mixed methods empirical studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This paper contributes to the field of mixed methods research by expanding the knowledge about metainferences and offering a practical framework of types of metainferences for mixed methods researchers and educators. The proposed framework offers an approach to identifying and recognizing types of metainferences in mixed methods research and serves as an opportunity for future discussion on the nature, insights, and characteristic features of metainferences within this methodology. By proposing a foundation for metainferences, our framework advances this critical area of mixed methods research.</p>","PeriodicalId":9114,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","volume":"25 1","pages":"18"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11758751/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-025-02475-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The generation of metainferences is a core and significant feature of mixed methods research. In recent years, there has been some discussion in the literature about criteria for appraising the quality of metainferences, the processes for generating them, and the critical role that assessing the "fit" of quantitative and qualitative data and results plays in this generative process. However, little is known about the types of insights that emerge from generating metainferences. To address this gap, this paper conceptualize and present the types and forms of metainferences that can be generated in MMR studies for guiding future research projects.
Methods: A critical review of literature sources was conducted, including peer-reviewed articles, book chapters, and research reports. We performed a non-systematic literature search in the Scopus, Web of Science, Ovid, and Google Scholar databases using general phrases such as "inferences in research", "metainferences in mixed methods", "inferences in mixed methods research", and "inference types". Additional searches included key methodological journals, such as the Journal of Mixed Methods Research, International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, Methodological Innovations, and the Sage Research Methods database, to locate books, chapters, and peer-reviewed articles that discussed inferences and metainferences.
Results: We propose two broad types of metainferences and five sub-types. The broad metainferences are global and specific, and the subtypes include relational, predictive, causal, comparative, and elaborative metainferences. Furthermore, we provide examples of each type of metainference from published mixed methods empirical studies.
Conclusions: This paper contributes to the field of mixed methods research by expanding the knowledge about metainferences and offering a practical framework of types of metainferences for mixed methods researchers and educators. The proposed framework offers an approach to identifying and recognizing types of metainferences in mixed methods research and serves as an opportunity for future discussion on the nature, insights, and characteristic features of metainferences within this methodology. By proposing a foundation for metainferences, our framework advances this critical area of mixed methods research.
背景:干扰的产生是混合方法研究的核心和重要特征。近年来,文献中有一些关于评估会议质量的标准,产生会议的过程,以及评估定量和定性数据和结果的“契合度”在这一生成过程中所起的关键作用的讨论。然而,对于从产生会议中产生的见解类型知之甚少。为了解决这一差距,本文概念化并提出了MMR研究中可能产生的会议的类型和形式,以指导未来的研究项目。方法:对文献来源进行批判性回顾,包括同行评议的文章、书籍章节和研究报告。我们在Scopus、Web of Science、Ovid和谷歌Scholar数据库中进行了非系统的文献检索,使用了“研究中的推论”、“混合方法中的元干扰”、“混合方法研究中的推论”和“推论类型”等一般短语。其他搜索包括关键的方法论期刊,如《混合方法研究期刊》、《国际多元研究方法期刊》、《方法论创新》和Sage研究方法数据库,以查找讨论推论和会议的书籍、章节和同行评议的文章。结果:我们提出了两大类型的会议和五个亚类型。广泛的会议是全局的和具体的,子类型包括关系的、预测的、因果的、比较的和详细的会议。此外,我们从已发表的混合方法实证研究中提供了每种类型会议的例子。结论:本文扩充了关于会议的知识,并为混合方法研究者和教育者提供了一个实用的会议类型框架,为混合方法研究领域做出了贡献。提出的框架提供了一种在混合方法研究中识别和识别会议类型的方法,并为未来讨论该方法中会议的性质、见解和特征提供了机会。通过提出会议的基础,我们的框架推进了混合方法研究的这一关键领域。
期刊介绍:
BMC Medical Research Methodology is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in methodological approaches to healthcare research. Articles on the methodology of epidemiological research, clinical trials and meta-analysis/systematic review are particularly encouraged, as are empirical studies of the associations between choice of methodology and study outcomes. BMC Medical Research Methodology does not aim to publish articles describing scientific methods or techniques: these should be directed to the BMC journal covering the relevant biomedical subject area.