| KRATKA VSEBINA | Background: The popularity of integrating quantitative and qualitative methodologies in the same research has grown incredibly in recent years. There is a lack of evidence about the efficiency of mixed methods use in health sciences research practice. The purpose of this study was to analyse the areas, main research themes, mixedmethods research design typologies and efficiency of implementation and further open questions regarding mixed methods in health sciences. Methods:A systematic review was made on a sample of 25 scientific articles of health sciences that stated mixed methods use in research. Inclusion criteria: original scientific article with applying and evaluating of mixedmethods, published during the period July 2006 - July 2011 in a peer reviewed journal, included in international databases: WebSurveyMethodology, CINAHL, MEDLINE and PubMed. Results: All 25 studies provided effectiveness of mixed methods use in health science research practice. Mixed methods are the most popular in nursing (32%) and health promotion (28%). Sequential mixed methods research design is prevalent (64.3%), with the first research phase in priority (71.4%). The relation between quantitative (57.2%) and qualitative (42.8%) priority approach is balanced. Complementarity (57.1%), triangulation (28.6%) and expansion (14.3%) are the most common research purposes for using mixed methods in health sciences. Conclusions: The presented findings confirmed mixed methods applicability for the complex and less studied research problems inhealth sciences. Conceptualisation of mixed methods in different disciplines of health sciences, development of quality criteria and standards for mixed methods research assessment and expansion of mixed methods in clinical practice as support in evidence based practice development appeared as the most important research questions of mixed methods in health sciences that should be addressed in the future studies. // Izhodišča: Priljubljenost integracije kvantitativne in kvalitativne metodologije v isti raziskavi je neverjetno narasla v zadnjih letih. Nimamopa veliko podatkov o uspešnosti njihove uporabe v raziskovalni praksi na področju zdravstva. Namen te raziskave je bil analizirati področja, osrednje raziskovalne tematike, vrste raziskovalnih načrtov, uspešnost uporabe in nadaljnja odprta vprašanja integracije metod v raziskavah v zdravstvu. Metode: Raziskava temelji na sistematični pregledni študiji 25 znanstvenih člankov s področja zdravstva, ki so pri svojem raziskovanju uporabili integracijo metod. Vključitvena merila: izvirni znanstveni članekz uporabo in evalvacijo integracije metod, objavljen v obdobju julij 2006-julij 2011 v reviji z recenzijo, ki je vključena v mednarodne baze podatkov: WebSurvey Methodology, CINAHL, MEDLINE in PubMed. Rezultati: Vseh25 analiziranih raziskav je potrdilo uspešnost uporabe integracije metod v raziskavah v zdravstvu. Uporaba integracije metod je najpogostejša na področju zdravstvene nege (32%) in promocije zdravja (28%). Prevladuje zaporedni način izvedbe kvantitativne in kvalitativne faze raziskave (64,3%), pri čemer je prva faza v večini primerov dominantna (71,4%). Razmerje med kvantitativnim (57,2%) in kvalitativnim (42,8%) prioritetnim pristopom je uravnoteženo. Najpogosteje uporabljeni nameni integracije metod v raziskavah v zdravstvu so komplementarnost (57,1%), triangulacija (28,6%) in ekspanzija (14,3%). Zaključki: Dobljene ugotovitve potrjujejo uporabnost integracije metod pri raziskovanju kompleksnih in manj raziskanih problematik v zdravstvu ter izkazujejo potrebe po nadaljnjih raziskovanjih, kot so: konceptualizacija integracije metod v posameznih disciplinah zdravstvenih ved, razvoj meril in standardov ocenjevanja kakovosti raziskav z integracijo metod ter razširitev uvedbe integracije metod v klinično prakso kot podpore pri razvoju na dokazih podprte prakse. |