Discussion paper proposes collaging for integrating literature with research data in mixed methods, highlighting its applications.
Aims To propose the collaging integration procedure for linking literature and theory to research data in mixed methods research (MMR) and illustrate its application in two mixed methods studies. Design Discussion paper/research methodology. Data Sources The collaging technique was used and developed based on two exploratory sequential nurse‐led mixed‐methods studies. Results The collaging technique entails using multiple artefacts (data fragments, figures and textual information) within one figure. Collaging can generate relevant pre‐post linkages, create meaning and refine inferences and meta‐inferences. Conclusion This paper offers a novel integration technique for meaningful integration of the literature review and theoretical dimensions in the integration trilogy. Implications for Nursing Nurse researchers can use the collaging integration procedure for effective integration for conducting rigorous mixed‐methods research. Collaging is a straightforward yet effective technique for enhancing integration in the literature review and theoretical dimensions in MMR. Impact Linking literature review, theory and research data facilitates a more meaningful interpretation of research findings. While researchers may be able to create a more fully integrated MMR design by integrating multiple dimensions of the study, to date, most of the empirical and methodological literature on MMR has focused on integration at the design, fieldwork, analysis and interpretation dimensions, ignoring others, such as the literature review and theoretical dimensions. Collaging enables intensive analysis of the raw data and embeds the insights gained from literature and theory throughout the data analysis and presentation, thereby avoiding neglecting insights which could have been gained by back‐and‐forth comparison and integration of literature review and theoretical underpinnings. Patient or Public Contribution No direct patient or public contribution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Younas et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: