Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
AIM: We sought to explore the processes of methodologic and data-analysis triangulation in case studies using the example of research on nurse practitioners in primary health care. DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a scoping review within Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework, considering studies that defined a case study design and used 2 or more data sources, published in English or German before August 2023. DATA SOURCES: The databases searched were MEDLINE and CINAHL, supplemented with hand searching of relevant nursing journals. We also examined the reference list of all the included studies. RESULTS: In total, 63 reports were assessed for eligibility. Ultimately, we included 8 articles. Five studies described within-method triangulation, whereas 3 provided information on between/across-method triangulation. No study reported within-method triangulation of 2 or more quantitative data-collection procedures. The data-collection procedures were interviews, observation, documentation/documents, service records, and questionnaires/assessments. The data-analysis triangulation involved various qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis. Details about comparing or contrasting results from different qualitative and mixed-methods data were lacking. CONCLUSIONS: Various processes for methodologic and data-analysis triangulation are described in this scoping review but lack detail, thus hampering standardization in case study research, potentially affecting research traceability. Triangulation is complicated by terminological confusion. To advance case study research in nursing, authors should reflect critically on the processes of triangulation and employ existing tools, like a protocol or mixed-methods matrix, for transparent reporting. The only existing reporting guideline should be complemented with directions on methodologic and data-analysis triangulation.
Schlunegger et al. (Tue,) studied this question.