The NIA health disparities research framework details a life course approach that considers multilevel environmental, sociocultural, behavioral, and biological factors. Mixed methods are well-suited to study complex problems like structural racism, combining the benefits of generalizability with contextualization.
Methods
We draw on experience as faculty in the Mixed Methods Research Training Program for the Health Sciences to introduce mixed methods research on health equity and disparities in dementia and cognitive impairment.
Results
We describe common reasons why health science investigators may use mixed methods, provide examples of mixed methods designs, and discuss challenges and practicalities of mixed methods research.
Discussion
Many risk factors for dementia are modifiable, so the emphasis of research turns from description to intervention studies that enhance health equity. The information and insights acquired from the use of mixed methods are central in tailoring interventions to populations most affected by Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias.
Alzheimer’s Association. (2022). 2022 Alzheimer’s disease facts and figures. Alzheimer's and Dementia, 18(4), 700–789. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12638
2.
ArandaM. P.KremerI. N.HintonL.ZissimopoulosJ.WhitmerR. A.HummelC. H.TrejoL.FabiusC. (2021). Impact of dementia: Health disparities, population trends, care interventions, and economic costs. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 69(7), 1774–1783. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.17345
3.
AschbrennerK. A.KruseG.GalloJ. J.Plano ClarkV. L. (2022). Applying mixed methods to pilot feasibility studies to inform intervention trials. Pilot and Feasibility Studies, 8(1), 217–224. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-022-01178-x
4.
BaileyZ. D.FeldmanJ. M.BassettM. T. (2021). How structural racism works - racist policies as a root cause of U.S. racial health inequities. New England Journal of Medicine, 384(8), 768–773. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMms2025396
BowerK. M.ThorpeR. J.Jr.RohdeC.GaskinD. J. (2014). The intersection of neighborhood racial segregation, poverty, and urbanicity and its impact on food store availability in the United States. Preventive Medicine, 58(1), 33–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2013.10.010
ChanK. S.GaskinD. J.McClearyR. R.ThorpeR. J. (2019). Availability of health care provider offices and facilities in minority and integrated communities in the U.S. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 30(3), 986–1000. https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.2019.0069
9.
CoyleC. E.Schulman-GreenD.FederS.ToramanS.PrustM. L.Plano ClarkV. L.CurryL. (2018). Federal funding for mixed methods research in the health sciences in the United States: Recent trends. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 12(3), 305–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689816662578
10.
CreamerE. G. (2017). An introduction to fully integrated mixed methods research. Sage Publications.
11.
CreswellJ. W.Plano ClarkV. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
12.
CurranG. M.BauerM.MittmanB.PyneJ. M.StetlerC. (2012). Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: Combining elements of clinical effectiveness and implementation research to enhance public health impact. Medical Care, 50(3), 217–226. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182408812
13.
CurryL.ShieldR.WetleT. (Eds.), (2006). Improving aging and public health research: Qualitative and mixed methods. American Public Health Association.
14.
CurryL. A.O'CathainA.ClarkV. L. P.AroniR.FettersM.BergD. (2012). The role of group dynamics in mixed methods health sciences research teams. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(1), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689811416941
15.
DahlbergB.WittinkM.GalloJ. J. (2010). Funding and publishing integrated studies: Writing effective mixed methods manuscripts and grant proposals. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 775–802). Sage Publications.
16.
DeanL. T.ThorpeR. J. (2022). What structural racism is (or is not) and how to measure it: Clarity for public health and medical researchers. American Journal of Epidemiology, 191(9), 1521–1526. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwac112
17.
DeJonckheereM.Lindquist-GrantzR.ToramanS.HaddadK.VaughnL. M. (2018). Intersection of mixed methods and community-based participatory research: A methodological review. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(4), 481–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689818778469
18.
EldhA. C.WallinL.FredrikssonM.VengbergS.WinbladU.HalfordC.DahlstromT. (2016). Factors facilitating a national quality registry to aid clinical quality improvement: Findings of a national survey. British Medical Journal Open, 6(11), Article e011562. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011562
19.
EliacinJ.PolsinelliA. J.EppersonF.GaoS.Van HeidenS.WestmorelandG.RichardsR.RichardsM.CampbellC.HendrieH.RisacherS. L.SaykinA. J.WangS. (2023). Barriers and facilitators to participating in Alzheimer's disease biomarker research in black and white older adults. Alzheimer's and Dementia, 9(2), Article e12399. https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.12399
20.
ForresterS. N.GalloJ. J.WhitfieldK. E.ThorpeR. J. (2019). A framework of minority stress: From physiological manifestations to cognitive outcomes. The Gerontologist, 59(6), 1017–1023. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gny104
21.
GaskinD. J.ThorpeR. J.Jr.McGintyE. E.BowerK.RohdeC.YoungJ. H.LaVeistT. A.DubayL. (2014). Disparities in diabetes: The nexus of race, poverty, and place. American Journal of Public Health, 104(11), 2147–2155. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301420
22.
GeeG. C.FordC. L. (2011). Structural racism and health inequities: Old issues, new directions. Du Bois Review, 8(1), 115–132. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X11000130
23.
GeronimusA. T.HickenM.KeeneD.BoundJ. (2006). “Weathering” and age patterns of allostatic load scores among blacks and whites in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 96(5), 826–833. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2004.060749
24.
GroothuijseJ. M.van TolL. S.LeeuwenC.van DeldenJ. J. M.CaljouwM. A. A.AchterbergW. P. (2024). Active involvement in scientific research of persons living with dementia and long-term care users: A systematic review of existing methods with a specific focus on good practices, facilitators and barriers of involvement. BioMed Central Geriatrics, 24(1), 324. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-024-04877-7
25.
GuestG.BunceA.JohnsonL. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
26.
GuestG.NameyE.McKennaK. (2016). How many focus groups are enough? Building an evidence base for nonprobability sample sizes. Field Methods, 29(1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X16639015
27.
GuettermanT. C. (2017). What distinguishes a novice from an expert mixed methods researcher?Quality and Quantity, 51(1), 377–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-016-0310-9
28.
GuettermanT. C.FettersM. D. (2018). Two methodological approaches to the integration of mixed methods and case study designs: A systematic review. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(7), 900–918. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218772641
29.
GuettermanT. C.FettersM. D.CreswellJ. W. (2015). Integrating quantitative and qualitative results in health science mixed methods research through joint displays. The Annals of Family Medicine, 13(6), 554–561. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1865
30.
GuettermanT. C.ManojlovichM. (2024). Grand rounds in methodology: Designing for integration in mixed methods research. British Medical Journal Quality & Safety, 33(7), 470–478. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2023-016112
31.
GuettermanT. C.SakakibaraR. V.Plano ClarkV. L.LuborskyM.MurrayS. M.CastroF. G.CreswellJ. W.DeutschC.GalloJ. J. (2019). Mixed methods grant applications in the health sciences: An analysis of reviewer comments. PLoS One, 14(11), Article e0225308. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225308
32.
HillC. V.Pérez-StableE. J.AndersonN. A.BernardM. A. (2015). The National Institute on Aging health disparities research framework. Ethnicity and Disease, 25(3), 245–254. https://doi.org/10.18865/ed.25.3.245
33.
HopkinsonJ.KingA.YoungL.McEwanK.ElliottF.HydonK.MuthukrishnanS.TopeR.VeitchA. M.HowellsC.HoskinsM. (2021). Crisis management for people with dementia at home: Mixed-methods case study research to identify critical factors for successful home treatment. Health and Social Care in the Community, 29(4), 1072–1082. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.13141
34.
HowellB. M.SeaterM.McLindenD. (2021). Using concept mapping methods to define “healthy aging” in Anchorage, Alaska. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 40(4), 404–413. https://doi.org/10.1177/0733464819898643
35.
JenkinsE.SzantonS.HornsteinE.ReiffJ.SeauQ.HuynhG.GrayJ.Smith WrightR.LiQ.CotterV.CurrieroS.TaylorJ. (2025). The use of photovoice to explore the physical disability experience in older adults with mild cognitive impairment/early dementia. Dementia. (London), 24(1), 40–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/14713012241272754
36.
JohnsonR. B.OnwuegbuzieA. J.TurnerL. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed method research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 112–134. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689806298224
37.
JohnsonR. B.SchoonenboomJ. (2016). Adding qualitative and mixed methods research to health intervention studies: Interacting with differences. Qualitative Health Research, 26(5), 587–602. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617479
38.
JonesC. P. (2000). Levels of racism: A theoretic framework and a gardener's tale. American Journal of Public Health, 90(8), 1212–1215. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.90.8.1212
39.
JonesD. E.Kinquist GrantzR.DeJonchkheereM. (2020). A review of mixed methods community-based paritcipatory research applications in mental health. Journal of Social, Behavioral and Health Sciences, 14(1), 254–288. https://doi.org/10.5590/JSBHS.2020.14.1.18
40.
LandsverkJ.BrownC. H.ChamberlainP.PalinkasL. A.OgiharaM.CzajaS.Goldhaber-FiebertJ. D.Rolls ReutzJ. A.HorwitzS. (2012). Design and analysis in dissemination and implementation research. In BrownsonR. C.ColditzG. A.ProctorE. K. (Eds.), Dissemination and implementation research in health: Translating science to practice (pp. 225–260). Oxford University Press.
41.
LeCroyM. N.PotterL. N.Bandeen-RocheK.BiancoM. E.CappolaA. R.CarterE. B.DayanP. S.EckstromE.EdwardsD. F.FarabiS. S.FisherS. D.GiordanoJ.HansonH. A.JenkinsE.JuhnY.KaskelF.StakeC. E.ReedsD. N.SchleissM. R.McColleyS. A. (2023). Barriers to and solutions for representative inclusion across the lifespan and in life course research: The need for structural competency highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science, 7(1), Article e38. https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2022.510
42.
LennonJ. C.AitaS. L.BeneV. A. D.RhoadsT.ReschZ. J.EloiJ. M.WalkerK. A. (2022). Black and White individuals differ in dementia prevalence, risk factors, and symptomatic presentation. Alzheimer's and Dementia, 18(8), 1461–1471. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12509
43.
LimU.WangS.ParkS. Y.BogumilD.WuA. H.ChengI.HaimanC. A.Le MarchandL.WilkensL. R.WhiteL.SetiawanV. W. (2022). Risk of Alzheimer's disease and related dementia by sex and race/ethnicity: The Multiethnic Cohort Study. Alzheimer's and Dementia, 18(9), 1625–1634. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12528
44.
LivingstonG.HuntleyJ.SommerladA.AmesD.BallardC.BanerjeeS.BrayneC.BurnsA.Cohen-MansfieldJ.CooperC.CostafredaS. G.DiasA.FoxN.GitlinL. N.HowardR.KalesH. C.KivimakiM.LarsonE. B.OgunniyiA.MukadamN. (2020). Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 report of the lancet commission. Lancet, 396(10248), 413–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30367-6
45.
MalterudK.SiersmaV. D.GuassoraA. D. (2016). Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power. Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1753–1760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444
46.
MayedaE. R.GlymourM. M.QuesenberryC. P.WhitmerR. A. (2016). Inequalities in dementia incidence between six racial and ethnic groups over 14 years. Alzheimer's and Dementia, 12(3), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2015.12.007
47.
O'CathainA. (2018). A practical guide to using qualitative research with randomized controlled trials. Oxford University Press.
48.
PalinkasL.AaronsG.HorwitzS.ChamberlainP.HurlburtM.LandsverkJ. (2011). Mixed method designs in implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 38(1), 44–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-010-0314-z
49.
PlassmanB. L.LangaK. M.FisherG. G.HeeringaS. G.WeirD. R.OfstedalM. B.BurkeJ. R.HurdM. D.PotterG. G.RodgersW. L.SteffensD. C.WillisR. J.WallaceR. B. (2007). Prevalence of dementia in the United States: The aging, demographics, and memory study. Neuroepidemiology, 29(1-2), 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1159/000109998
50.
PowerM. C.BennettE. E.TurnerR. W.DowlingN. M.CiarleglioA.GlymourM. M.GianattasioK. Z. (2021). Trends in relative incidence and prevalence of dementia across non-Hispanic Black and White individuals in the United States, 2000-2016. Journal of the American Medical Association Neurology, 78(3), 275–284. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.4471
51.
SzantonS. L.LeffB.LiQ.BreysseJ.SpoelstraS.KellJ.PurvisJ.XueQ. L.WilsonJ.GitlinL. N. (2021). CAPABLE program improves disability in multiple randomized trials. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 69(12), 3631–3640. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.17383
52.
TeddlieC.YuF. (2007). Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 77–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689806292430
53.
TschanzJ. T.Welsh-BohmerK. A.LyketsosC. G.CorcoranC.GreenR. C.HaydenK.NortonM. C.ZandiP. P.TooneL.WestN. A.BreitnerJ. C.,Cache County Investigators. (2006). Conversion to dementia from mild cognitive disorder: The Cache County Study. Neurology, 67(2), 229–234. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000224748.48011.84
54.
WellerN.BarnesJ. (2014). Finding pathways: Mixed-method research for studying causal mechanisms. Cambridge University Press.
