Absolutely. Will be very fitting.

Yes thematic analysis can be used in mixed method research. Qualitative data of mixed method requires thematic analysis in one way or another

Thanks a lot.

It sounds like what you are doing is a "systematic review," and thematic analysis is a common technique for that. I do, however, see any quantitative component in your research design.

Dear David,

thank you for answering this question.

I am under impression that systemic review requires more rigorous approach of collecting data I.e. one discipline for gathering and analysing the data. however , in my case I have gathered data from multiple disciplines (Medicine, psychology and social work, Nursing and health sciences) 59 cover my topic as it is broadly discussed around all these disciplines. Therefore, I thought i might be doing a semi-systematic review using data from both qualitative and quantitative articles.

please correct me if I am wrong.

I think of systematic review as limited to qualitative research, but it will be interesting to hear what others have to say.

If it is a mixed methods literature review, I would suggest use Thematic Synthesis by Thomas and Harden, or depending on the purpose you can use critical interpretative synthesis, realist synthesis, or meta-ethnography. Thematic analysis is only use for actual data gathered during qualitative research.

Ahtisham Younas I used Google Scholar to look up a combination of "thematic analysis" and "systematic review" and got over 50,000 citations. In contrast, a search for just "Thematic Synthesis" produced less than 20,000 hits.

I think consensus is always an important issue in research. If you want your reviewers to know what you are doing, it helps to be doing "what everybody else does."

Basically, you are doing secondary analysis (SA) which entails using secondary data that has already been acquired by someone else. This type of data is also known as “past data,” and it is made available through previous studies, government documents, and a variety of online and offline venues. According to Grant and Booth (2009), there are 14 review types associated with SA. One of which is mixed methods SA which could review quantitative and qualitative studies or employ a combination of different review approaches such as meta-analysis (statistics-based) and qualitative systematic review/qualitative evidence synthesis (based on thematic analysis). Here is the full citation.

Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies: A typology of reviews, Maria J. Grant & Andrew Booth. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x

Good luck,

Besides, you might find the following articles relevantly interesting.

Paré, G., Trudel, M.-C., Jaana, M., & Kitsiou, S. (2015). Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews. Information & Management, 52(2), 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2014.08.008

Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-45

Best,

Thank you everyone for taking your time and sharing your views to answer my question.

However I am in agreement with Thomas Owren

In my case, As I have gathered secondary qualitative and quantitative data from different disciplines, I will use a mixed method research design Incorporating a semi-systematic literature review of the research articles, journals and gov publications. And to analyse the data, I will be using Braun and Clarke (2006) thematic analysis to search for themes that will inform my findings.

I am hoping for it to work. 😇

David L Morgan I would have to agree with Thomas Owren. Based on my reading of Barun and Clark's work, they never advanced the use of thematic analysis for systematic or any other reviews. Their most recent paper compares TA with interpretative phenomenological, constant comparative analysis, and content analysis and they explicilty note that thematic analysis is more relevant for raw qualitative data. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Can I use TA? Should I use TA? Should I not use TA? Comparing reflexive thematic analysis and other pattern‐based qualitative analytic approaches. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 21(1), 37-47.

Thematic analysis is quite misunderstood and misused among researchers and therefore people use it because others are using it. Mixed methods systematic reviews have their established methods which should be used. With regards to reviewers, I review for many nursing and health journals and have recommended rejection for reviews that used thematic analysis when more relevant methods were available. The editors are yet to raise any concerns about my recommendation on this issue. Obviously, this could differ across disciplines.

Yea you can use thematic analysis but better to use CIS as per modern synthesis

I think that grouping the findings across qualitative studies according to themes is quite sensible as a method of systematic review, whether Braun and Clarke invented it or not. In particular, it important to remember that their 2006 article makes clear that they are basically establishing a "brand" (their words) for something that qualitative researchers have been doing for decades.

Since Braun and Clarkes' TA consists of little more than coding the data and then building theme from those codes, I'm not sure what it means to reject an article "when more relevant methods were available.."

Yes, (in agreement with Thomas Owren), qualitative inquiry is context-specific (inductive) should consider what method/s fit your work.