Qualitative versus quantitative research.
As a biologist, microbiologist and epidemiologist, received comprehensive training in quantitative methods and was essentially "programmed" to think in quantitative terms in regard to almost everything that has to do with science and public health. Yet, recently I attended the 12th Annual Midwest Qualitative Research Conference held at the University of St. Thomas in Minneapolis, Minn. I audited several presentations on research in which primarily qualitative methods were used to study a variety of topics including those that deal with issues related to public health. I was amazed how powerful qualitative methods are and how useful they can be in research.
Based on this experience, I agree with the statement of Terrie Wetle, PhD, one of the book's co-authors, that "qualitative and mixed methods research strategies provide us with useful tools for developing a deeper understanding of (people's) beliefs, behaviors and health conditions." I believe we should include qualitative research methods in our science and public health education. This way, we would provide a more comprehensive training to future researchers.
Stadtlander, PhD, MPH,
St. Paul, Minn.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Title Annotation:||LETTERS: Personal perspectives on public health|
|Publication:||The Nation's Health|
|Article Type:||Letter to the editor|
|Date:||Dec 1, 2006|
|Previous Article:||Routine HIV testing a challenge to research.|
|Next Article:||Gloves don't always lead to safer food.|