Quantitative Versus Qualitative Study Comparison: Type 2 Diabetes Among Asian Americans

Research study types tend to fall into two distinct categories—that of qualitative and quantitative research. Quantitative research studies are data-driven and seek to answer a particular research question. Qualitative research studies are open-ended and inductive in their techniques; even when they may use statistical data, their focus is experiential. When assessing the impact of a lifestyle disease like type 2 diabetes, it is particularly important to consider the lived, subjective experiences of participants, despite the protest from some quarters that qualitative research is not real science. While it might be true that the risks of developing the condition can be mitigated through weight loss and healthier eating, individuals do not always show a willingness to make lifestyle changes until it is too late. Genetic factors have a predisposition in terms of increasing the likelihood of someone developing diabetes but environment and personal decisions also have an impact. With this in mind, analyzing quantitative and qualitative studies regarding Asian-Americans’ specific predisposition to developing type 2 diabetes can be useful.

In a study by Choi (et al. 2013) using the California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) of California adults aged 18 and older (n=46,091), demographics in regards to ethnic and gender-based populations of individuals with diabetes were assessed to determine patterns of manifesting the disorder among Asian-Americans. The approach of the study was descriptive in nature. While many quantitative studies utilize the scientific method of constructing a hypothesis which can be either proved or disproved based upon the construct of the experiment, this study merely attempted to identify trends, specifically the extent to which gender and ethnicity impacted the tendency of the participants to manifest obesity. Descriptive studies are often used to support and shape later studies which have a more clearly hypothesis-driven...

In support of its design was the notable observation that patterns of obesity often seem to be affected by genetic influences related to race, and diabetes is a disease more prevalent in the population as a whole among males rather than females. The researchers attempted to ascertain if these patterns were true of the Asian-American subset population, but stated no specific preliminary hypothesis about what they expected to find. They also did not determine beforehand if certain Asian-American populations would be more apt to manifest diabetes but rather merely examined the data and reported their findings.
The source of the data was the CHIS, a twice annual telephone survey of randomly-selected Californians of various races who are asked to answer health-related questions. To analyze the statistical data accrued by the study, a Chi-squared test was used to compare the prevalence of type 2 diabetes among different racial and ethnic categories assessed by the CHIS for both genders. Given the minimal risk to participants and the voluntary nature of the participation, the study was considered to be ethical by according to acceptable standards of research conduct.

The findings of the “age-adjusted DM and associated risk factor prevalence varies by gender and race/ethnicity among Asian subgroups as compared with Caucasian and other racial/ethnic minorities in California” given “Filipinos had the greatest likelihood of DM, followed by Koreans, and South Asians” (Choi, 2013, par. 23). There were also marked gendered differences with the subgroup of Asian-Americans: “Among men, Filipino men had the greatest DM likelihood, followed by, South Asian, and Korean men….Koreans, particularly Korean women, are newly identified high-risk group for DM and require urgent prevention effort” (Choi, 2013, par. 23).

The study was admittedly limited, given that it was conducted primarily via…