If you can use mixed-method methodology for your studies

Mixed-methods would be a possibility depending on your research questions. Best of luck.

Absolutely! But do you need to?

You need to think about what you are seeking to understand. Try not to water down your research by using mixed methods for no other reason than you think it would be better to show 'the whole picture'. Some researchers fall into this trap.

If you really want to understand the lived experience of cancer sufferers then qualitative would be appropriate, and yes, this is also enough. We have improved our treatments for cancer patients in great strides just because of qualitative research giving us a deeper understanding of what our patients go through.

If you want to compare outcomes, or look at increased mortality rates etc, then quantitative would be a really good choice. This data is valuable for those who are seeking hard facts.

You don't have to do both for good research as either one can stand up for itself. If you do choose to do both, perhaps simplify the design and focus more upon a particular area. Don't bite off too big a portion as you may find it will take too long, or your findings could just end up just being 'nebulous'.

I agree with Sonja Maria; what type of research were you hoping to carry out? I would expect that there will be further studies written from the quantitative perspective, but one from the perspective of a much smaller number of people who could describe what it was like to have cancer at this time and their perspective on the outcome of their treatment would be valuable.

Once completed and written up for publication, your work would be more likely to stand out as being different and to be referenced in times to come. What's more, valuable lessons could be learnt - I would think - as all this is so new.

Would you be able to gain access to interview people who had experienced cancer and could give their own story and interpretation of the outcome?

I did a similar study (initially with my supervisors) about 'Living with faecal incontinence' and I continued it to a 5 year and a 10 year follow-up. I think this type of longer term approach would be the most useful.

I would think that you could give a minimal amount of numerical data just to set the scene (?)

I hope this helps and very best wishes with it,

Mary

I absolutely agree with the suggestion of Sonja Maria. I think it will largely depend on what type of specific outcomes you want to look at. Obviously, Oncology outcomes are too wide. You may either choose to focus on clinical outcomes or the social and economic effect of Covid-19 on cancer care. I think in the specific case u mentioned, you may want to understand the perspectives and experiences of patients in terms of how Covid-19 impacted on their quality of care; i.e. the impacts of the lockdown, telephone consultations (at a point), the reduced psycho-social support etc. If this is the direction u want to go, then a qualitative research would be more appropriate in this regard. However, you can still come clearer on the type of outcomes u want to look at so that we can further discuss and suggest if quantitative/qualitative or both will be more appropriate. Good luck with your research

I agree with others who have suggested that mixed methods should not always be regarded as the optimum approach. However, I differ from their assumption that Qualitative Research should just focus on mental constructs like 'experiences'.

Qualitative Research can study behaviours in naturalistic settings unavailable to quant researchers. In terms of your research interest, you could then study meetings where physicians and/ or hospital administrators made decisions about whether to admit or treat cancer patients during the COVID epidemic.

I still this would make a very interesting qualitative study, as discussed above by Dr David Silverman.

Godfred Otchere - the responses to your question have been varied - it would be really interesting to read what type of study you do decide on when it is 'make your mind up' time. Perhaps you could add it to this discussion. I expect that all the contributors would be interested and, as I do, wish you very best wishes with your study.

I believe your research problem determines the research approach to be used. For now, the world is still trying to understand covid-19 and very little is known about the phenomenon, the world is at the stage of describing the phenomenon, I will suggest qualitative exploratory studies for now.

Echoing Dr Silverman 's comment, I (IMHO) do believe that QUALI inductive research (associated with GTM and related frameworks) is adequate for establishing relational constructs between the researched phenomenon and identified units of research perceive - exploring how they (re)act, perceive, qualify and ultimately establish value attributes to it. Regarding "mixed methods", it really depends on the research approach and goals, making the most of the available data. In the latter case, longitudinal exploration probably might yield better results, even if not completely excluding cross-sectional studies from generating valuable contributions.