Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Group Design02:01

Group Design

9.3K
The most basic experimental design involves two groups: the experimental group and the control group. The two groups are designed to be the same except for one difference— experimental manipulation. The experimental group gets the experimental manipulation—that is, the treatment or variable being tested—and the control group does not. Since experimental manipulation is the only difference between the experimental and control groups, we can be sure that any differences between...
9.3K
Study Designs in Epidemiology01:20

Study Designs in Epidemiology

364
Epidemiological study designs are fundamental tools for investigating the distribution, determinants, and control of health conditions in populations. They help researchers understand the relationships between exposures and outcomes, and they broadly fall into two categories: "observational" and "experimental" studies.
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and...
364
Crossover Experiments01:16

Crossover Experiments

2.9K
Crossover experiments, also called the repeated-measurements design, is a study design in which all experimental units are exposed to all treatments in different periods. Crossover experiments are generally used in psychology, the pharmaceutical industry, agriculture, and medicine.
Crossover designs are performed even with smaller sample sizes since the samples can act as their controls. These are better than simple randomized trials since patients are exposed to all the treatments.
2.9K
Factorial Design02:01

Factorial Design

13.1K
Factorial Analysis is an experimental design that applies Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) statistical procedures to examine a change in a dependent variable due to more than one independent variable, also known as factors. Changes in worker productivity can be reasoned, for example, to be influenced by salary and other conditions, such as skill level. One way to test this hypothesis is by categorizing salary into three levels (low, moderate, and high) and skills sets into two levels (entry level...
13.1K
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

162
Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
162
Randomized Experiments01:13

Randomized Experiments

7.1K
The randomization process involves assigning study participants randomly to experimental or control groups based on their probability of being equally assigned. Randomization is meant to eliminate selection bias and balance known and unknown confounding factors so that the control group is similar to the treatment group as much as possible. A computer program and a random number generator can be used to assign participants to groups in a way that minimizes bias.
Simple randomization
Simple...
7.1K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

'Whole person' caregiver assessment: Insights from heart failure and stroke caregivers.

Social sciences & humanities open·2026
Same author

Physical frailty, depression and multimorbidity among older adults in Lima, Peru: a cross-sectional study.

BMC geriatrics·2026
Same author

CACE-MM: using mixed methods to strengthen causal inference in medicine and public health.

BMC medical research methodology·2026
Same author

A mixed methods analysis of health literacy among adults with brachial plexus birth injury.

Journal of pediatric rehabilitation medicine·2026
Same author

Harmonizing Qualitative Data Across Multiple Health Systems to Identify Quality Improvement Interventions: A Methodological Framework Using PROSPR II Cervical Research Center Data as Exemplar.

International journal of qualitative methods·2026
Same author

Opioid Overdose Risk Perceptions and Barriers and Facilitators to Naloxone Distribution for Hospitalized Patients Who Use Stimulants: A Qualitative Study of Patients and Clinicians.

Journal of addiction medicine·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Aug 27, 2025

Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities
10:26

Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities

Published on: September 11, 2021

4.0K

Applying mixed methods to pilot feasibility studies to inform intervention trials.

Kelly A Aschbrenner1, Gina Kruse2, Joseph J Gallo3

  • 1Psychiatry, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College, Hanover, USA. Kelly.Aschbrenner@dartmouth.edu.

Pilot and Feasibility Studies
|September 26, 2022
PubMed
Summary

This study provides guidance for using mixed methods in pilot feasibility studies. Integrating quantitative and qualitative data enhances understanding of intervention feasibility and informs future trials.

Keywords:
Feasibility studiesIntegrationInterventionMethodological guidanceMixed methodsPilot studiesQuantitative and qualitative

More Related Videos

Enactive Phenomenological Approach to the Trier Social Stress Test: A Mixed Methods Point of View
05:26

Enactive Phenomenological Approach to the Trier Social Stress Test: A Mixed Methods Point of View

Published on: January 7, 2019

6.8K
The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups
14:14

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups

Published on: May 13, 2022

6.0K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Aug 27, 2025

Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities
10:26

Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities

Published on: September 11, 2021

4.0K
Enactive Phenomenological Approach to the Trier Social Stress Test: A Mixed Methods Point of View
05:26

Enactive Phenomenological Approach to the Trier Social Stress Test: A Mixed Methods Point of View

Published on: January 7, 2019

6.8K
The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups
14:14

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups

Published on: May 13, 2022

6.0K

Area of Science:

  • Health intervention research
  • Mixed methods research

Background:

  • Pilot feasibility studies are crucial for preparing large-scale intervention trials.
  • Mixed methods can optimize learning from pilot studies, but guidance is limited.
  • This article addresses the need for methodological guidance on integrating mixed methods in pilot studies.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To offer methodological guidance for integrating quantitative and qualitative methods in pilot feasibility studies.
  • To help investigators plan mixed methods approaches for pilot studies.
  • To comprehensively address key research questions in pilot feasibility testing.

Main Methods:

  • An informal consensus-based process was used, informed by methodological resources and expertise.
  • Guidance was developed by faculty from the Mixed Methods Research Training Program (MMRTP) for the Health Sciences.
  • The approach focused on optimizing pilot feasibility studies through mixed methods integration.

Main Results:

  • Guidance includes identifying feasibility domains for mixed methods, aligning data sources, and determining data collection timing.
  • It also covers planning integrative analyses with joint displays and drawing meta-inferences.
  • These steps aim to enhance understanding of feasibility and inform future trials.

Conclusions:

  • Effective integration of quantitative and qualitative data in pilot studies yields comprehensive feasibility insights.
  • The provided guidance assists researchers in making key decisions for rigorous mixed methods approaches.
  • This enhances insights for future intervention trials.