Interpreting discordant results in mixed-method research: data triangulation, participant voices, and epistemic issues in health research

In this article, we discuss unexpected methodological challenges revealed during interim analysis of data from a mixed-methods study with female Mexican immigrants. '<i>Tertulias</i>' was a randomized controlled trial of an innovative peer support group model for reducing social isolation and depression among women immigrants from Mexico using a Community-Driven, Community-Engaged Research (CD-CEnR) approach. We describe discordant data obtained using different methods and how we went about triangulating and integrating analyses. In the process, we identified cultural, contextual, and methodological factors that influenced the nature and content of the data, and issues of power and epistemic justice in the broader research enterprise. Based on this experience, we offer insights for data integration to improve both scientific rigor and epistemic justice in health disparities research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Social Research Methodology
Published
2025-10-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2025.2569682
Primary Topic
Health Policy Implementation Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Interpreting discordant results in mixed-method research: data triangulation, participant voices, and epistemic issues in health research

Cristina Murray‐Krezan, Andrea Kalvesmaki, Janet Page‐Reeves, Daniel Perez Rodriguez et al.
International Journal of Social Research Methodology
Health Policy Implementation Science
article

Interpreting discordant results in mixed-method research: data triangulation, participant voices, and epistemic issues in health research

Cristina Murray‐Krezan, Andrea Kalvesmaki, Janet Page‐Reeves, Daniel Perez Rodriguez, Michael P. Moore, Megan Rivera, Maria Tellez, Rebecca M. Crocker, Jackie Perez, Lidia Regino, Elaine L. Bearer, Camille Vasquez, Evelyn Lozano, Pachely Mendivil-Aguayo, Reuben J. Thomas, Alejandro Aragon
article en

Abstract

In this article, we discuss unexpected methodological challenges revealed during interim analysis of data from a mixed-methods study with female Mexican immigrants. '<i>Tertulias</i>' was a randomized controlled trial of an innovative peer support group model for reducing social isolation and depression among women immigrants from Mexico using a Community-Driven, Community-Engaged Research (CD-CEnR) approach. We describe discordant data obtained using different methods and how we went about triangulating and integrating analyses. In the process, we identified cultural, contextual, and methodological factors that influenced the nature and content of the data, and issues of power and epistemic justice in the broader research enterprise. Based on this experience, we offer insights for data integration to improve both scientific rigor and epistemic justice in health disparities research.

International Journal of Social Research Methodology
New Mexico Department of Health (US), University of Arizona (US), University of New Mexico (US), University of Pittsburgh (US), VA Salt Lake City Healthcare System (US), Clínica Dávila (CL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 52%
Health Policy Implementation Science
DOISourceOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.