¶ … Jones, 2006), a qualitative study, to (Humar, 2001), a quantitative study, both studies were conducted for the same problem of serious venous catheter-related infections. Both studies were conducted for the same purpose of determining effective methods for venous catheter-related infection prevention. And, both studies used theoretical research of review of previous studies of venous catheter-related infections. Both studies identified limitations in previous studies and (Humar, 2001) identified limitations in the present study.
Where (Jones, 2006) was focused on examining weaknesses and findings of previous studies compared to standard best practices in data collection, (Humar, 2001) was a randomized control trial that tested two antiseptic solutions to determine which one was the most effective at preventing infection in central venous catheter sites. The different designs caused different data analysis where (Humar, 2001) used a statistical analysis of data collected and (Jones, 2006) used an analytical analysis of the instruments used, techniques identified, and the findings of previous research compared to current standard best practices.
Further research was recommended by (Humar, 2001) due to the significance in limitations of the present study. This study showed no utilization for the nursing practice due to limitations of needing more clarity. On the other hand, (Jones, 2006) made clear recommendations for research reporting to show more clarity in reporting and consider more variables to define the particulars of the studies. This study showed utilization in enhanced standards in the future and more education on infection control.
The qualitative design is advantageous for systematic review into nature or qualities of observable behavior (Ethnography, Observational Research, and Narrative Inquiry, 2013). It uses triangulation to attempt to explain how social structures act and interact. The disadvantage is that it relies less on reliability, validity and generalization. For example, (Jones, 2006) observes procedures from previous literature to compare against standards, but does not rely on experimental elements of reliability, validity, or generalization in the study it is actually performing.
The quantitative design is advantageous for understanding why social structures act and interact the way they do (Mamia, 2013). It enables research and description not directly observable, is suitable comparisons, describes change, and gives analysis and explanation of causal dependencies. It has disadvantages where it is only applicable to measurable phenomena, presumes relatively extensive knowledge to ask correct questions, and has difficulty in studying processes and expressing descriptions. For example, (Humar, 2001) is comparing the effectiveness of two antiseptics, but cannot explain the optimal agents in the antiseptics.
Qualitative research is a science because it observes to explain how natural elements act and interact with each other. Without understanding how natural elements work, it is difficult to explain why they work the way they do in quantitative research. Qualitative research explores to bring new knowledge to existing research knowledge.
You’re 84% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.