A multimethod approach in research means that:

1. Susman GI, Everend RD. An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Admin Sci Q. 1978;23:582–603.

   Article  Google Scholar 

2. Greenhalgh T, Howick J, Maskrey N. Evidence based medicine: A movement in crisis. BMJ. 2014;348:g3725.

   Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

3. Dwan KM, et al. Contribution of research and evaluation to health policy and practice. Aust Hlth Rev. 2013;37:194–98.

   Google Scholar 

4. Bosch-Capblanch X, et al. Guidance for evidence-informed policies about health systems: Rationale for and challenges of guidance development. PLoS Med. 2012;9(3):e1001185.

   Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

5. Hyder AA, et al. National policy-makers speak out: Are researchers giving them what they need? Health Policy Plan. 2011;26:73–82.

   Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

6. AHPSR/WHO – Alliance for Health Policy and System Research and the World Health Organization. Sound choices: Enhancing capacity for evidence-informed health policy. World Health Organization Library. 2007. http://www.who.int/alliance-hpsr/resources/Alliance_BR.pdf. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

7. AHPSR/WHO – Alliance for Health Policy and System Research and the World Health Organization. Neglected health systems research: Health information systems. 2008. http://digicollection.org/hss/documents/s15875e/s15875e.pdf. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

8. AHPSR/WHO – Alliance for Health Policy and System Research and the World Health Organization. Strategic plan 2011-2015: Bridging the worlds of research and policy. World Health Organization Press. 2011. http://www.who.int/alliance-hpsr/alliancehpsr_strategicplan2011.pdf. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

9. Kossi E, Saebo J, Titlestad O, R Tohouri & Braa J. Comparing strategies to integrate health information systems following a data warehouse approach in four countries. Journal of Information Technology for Development. 2011. http://www.uio.no/studier/emner/matnat/ifi/INF3290/h10/undervisningsmateriale/ComparingStrategiesForHISintegration.pdf. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

10. Anderson M, Cosby J, Swan B, Moore H, Broekhoven M. The use of research in local health service agencies. Soc Sci Med. 1999;49(8):1007–19.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

11. Green L, Ottoson J, Garcia C, Hiatt, R. Diffusion theory and knowledge dissemination, utilization, and integration in public health. Annu Rev Public Health. 2009. http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.031308.100049. Accessed 14 Apr 2016

12. Kottke T, Solberg L, Nelson A, Belcher D, Caplan W, Green L, Lydick E, Magid D, Rolnick S, Woolf S. Optimizing practice through research: A new perspective to solve an old problem. Ann Fam Med. 2008;6(5):459–62.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

13. McIntyre A. Participatory Action Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

14. Armstrong R. Participatory action research: A guide for community-based organizations. Vision Management Services. 2003. http://www.vision-management.ca/Assets/Articles/Participatory%20Action%20Research.pdf. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

15. Rabinowitz P, Berkowitz B. Community-based participatory action research. The Community Tool Box. 2012. http://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/evaluate/evaluation/intervention-research/main. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

16. Blagescu M, Young J. Capacity development for policy advocacy: Current thinking and approaches among agencies supporting civil society organizations. Overseas Development Institute. Working Paper 260. 2006. http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/docs/156.pdf. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

17. Choo CW. The knowing organization: How organizations use information to construct meaning, create knowledge and make decisions. IJIM. 1996;16(5):329–40.

    Google Scholar 

18. ICO Information Centre on HPV and Cervical Cancer (HPV Information Centre). Human Papillomavirus and Related Cancers – Kenya. 2014. http://www.hpvcentre.net/statistics/reports/KEN.pdf. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

19. DRH/MOPHS/GOK – Division of Reproductive Health, Ministry of Public Health & Sanitation, Government of Kenya. National Guidelines for Prevention and Management of Cervical, Breast and Prostate Cancers. 2012. https://www.iedea-ea.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_attachments&task=download&id=262. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

20. Wulf T, Meissner P, Stubner S. A scenario-based approach to strategic planning: Integrating planning and process perspective of strategy. HHL Working Paper. 2010. http://www.uni-marburg.de/fb02/strategy/dateien/scenarioapporach.pdf. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

21. Sadala M, Adorno R. Phenomenology as a method to investigate the experience lived: A perspective from Husserl and Merleau Ponty’s thought. J Adv Nurs. 2002;37(3):282–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

22. Jones HE, Brudney K, Sawo DJ, Lantigua R, Westhoff CL. The acceptability of a self-lavaging device compared to pelvic examination for cervical cancer screening among low-income women. J Womens Health. 2012;21(12):1275–81.

23. Balasubramanian A, Kulasingam SL, Baer A, et al. Accuracy and cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening by high-risk HPV DNA testing of self-collected vaginal samples. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2010;14(3):185–95.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

24. Castle P, Aftab A, Saint-Jean G, Mendez L. Detection of carcinogenic human papillomavirus in specimens collected with a novel self-sampling device. J Clin Microbiol. 2006:2158–2159.

25. Jones HE, Wiegerinck MA, Nieboer TE, Mol BW, Westhoff CL. Women in the Netherlands prefer self-sampling with a novel lavaging device to clinician collection of specimens for cervical cancer screening. Sex Transm Dis. 2008;35(11):916–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

26. Duke P et al. Effect of vaginal self-sampling and cervical cancer screening rates: A community-based study in Newfoundland. BMC Women’s Health. 2015. http://bmcwomenshealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12905-015-0206-1. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

27. Mungo C. Self-sampling for cervical cancer screening shows promise. Synapse – UCSF Student Newsletter. 2012. http://synapse.ucsf.edu/articles/2012/11/07/self-sampling-cervical-cancer-screening-shows-promise. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

28. Rositch A, Gatuguta A, Choi RY, et al. Knowledge and acceptability of pap smears, self-sampling and HPV vaccination among adult women in Kenya. PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e40766.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

29. Creswell J. Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

30. Tufford L, Newman P. Bracketing in qualitative research. Qual Soc Work. 2010;11(1):80–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

31. James EA, Slater T, Buckham A. Action research for business, non- profit and public administration. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2012.

32. O’Brien R. An overview of the methodological approach of action research. Faculty of Information Studies University of Toronto. 1998. http://folk.uio.no/patrickr/refdoc/actionResearch.ps. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

33. Greenwood DJ, Whyte WF, Harkavy I. Participatory action research as a process and as a goal. Hum Relat. 1993;46(2):175–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

34. Heidegger M, Farrell, Krell D. Basic writings from ‘Being and time’ (1927) to ‘The task of thinking’ (1964). Edited with general introduction and introductions to each selection by David Farrell Krell [translated from the German]. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul; 1993.

35. Giorgi A. Phenomenological and Psychological Research. Pittsburgh: Ducherne University Press; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

36. Koelsch L. Reconceptualizing the member check interview. Int J Qual Methods. 2013;12:168–79.

    Google Scholar 

37. Cho J, Trent A. Validity in qualitative research. Qual Res. 2006;6(3):319–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

38. Morse J, Barrett M, Mayan M, Olson K, Spiers J. Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. Int J Qual Methods. 2002;1(2):1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

39. Guba E, Lincoln Y. Effective evaluation: Improving the usefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic approaches. San Francisco: Jossey-Baas; 1981.

    Google Scholar 

40. Jones S, Torres V, Arminio J. Negotiating complexities of qualitative research in higher education. New York: Rutledge; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

41. Farren M. How can I create a pedagogy of the unique through a web of betweenness: Chapter five. PhD Dissertation, University of Bath. 2005. http://www.actionresearch.net/living/farren.shtml. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

42. Morgan DL. Practical strategies for combining qualitative and quantitative methods: Applications for health research. Qual Health Res. 1998;8:362–76.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

43. Reeder B, Turner AM. Scenario-based design: A method for connecting information system design with public health operations and emergency management. J Biomed Info. 2011;44:978–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

44. Oquist P. The epistemology of action research. Acta Sociologica. 1978. http://asj.sagepub.com/content/21/4/143.full.pdf+html. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

45. Bryman A. Social Research Methods. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

46. Krippendorff K. Content analysis. In: Barnouw E, Gerbner G, Schramm W, Worth TL, Gross L, editors. International encyclopedia of communication, vol. 1. New York: Oxford University Press; 1989. p. 403–7.

    Google Scholar 

47. Hut PM. Affinity diagram – Kawakita Jiro or KJ method. 2008. http://www.pmhut.com/affinity-diagram-kawakita-jiro-or-kj-method. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

    Google Scholar 

48. Wulf T, Brands C, Meissner P. A scenario-based approach to strategic planning: Tool description – impact/uncertainty grid. HHL Working Paper. 2011. http://www.scenarioplanning.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/_imported/fileadmin/user_upload/Tool_Description_Impact_Uncertainty_Grid_FINAL.pdf. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

49. Rouse M, Tucci L. Prescriptive analytics. SearchCIO. http://searchcio.techtarget.com/definition/Prescriptive-analytics. 2012. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

50. Duinker P, Greig L. Scenario analysis in environmental impact assessment: Improving explorations of the future. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 2007;27:206–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

51. Lustig I, Dietrich B, Johnson C, Dziekan C. The analytics journey. Analytics 2010. http://www.analytics-magazine.org/november-december-2010/54-the-analytics-journey. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

52. Denny L, Wright T. Strategies for overcoming the barriers to cervical cancer Screening in low-resource settings. Global Library of Women’s Medicine. 2009. http://www.glowm.com/section_view/heading/Strategies%20for%20Overcoming%20the%20Barriers%20to%20Cervical%20Cancer%20Screening%20in%20Low-Resource%20Settings/item/22. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

53. Sallam R, Cearley D. Advanced analytics: Predictive, collaborative and pervasive. 2012. https://www.gartner.com/doc/1926214. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

    Google Scholar 

54. Evans JR. Business analytics: The next frontier for decision sciences. Decision Line, Decision Sciences Institute. 2012. http://www.cbpp.uaa.alaska.edu/afef/business_analytics.htm. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

55. Laney D, Kart L. Emerging role of the data scientist and the art of data science. Gartner Report. 2012. https://www.gartner.com/doc/1955615/emerging-role-data-scientist-art. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

56. Wein A, Journeay M, Bernknopf R. Scenario-based risk analysis within an analytic-deliberative framework for regional risk reduction planning. MODSIM. 2007. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.566.4384. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

57. Montibeller G, Franco L. Raising the bar: Strategic multi-criteria decision analysis. Operational Research Group, Department of Management London School of Economics and Political Science. 2009. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/36180/. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

58. Yang X. Socio-cultural knowledge in conversational inference. Asian Soc Sci. 2009;5(8):136–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

59. AFIDEP & PAI – African Institute for Development Policy & Population Action International. Population, Climate Change, and Sustainable Development in Kenya. 2012. AFIDEP and PAI, Nairobi and Washington, DC. https://www.afidep.org/?wpfb_dl=26. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

60. ACCP – Alliance for Cervical Cancer Prevention. Strategies for supporting women with cancer. Seattle: ACCP. Cervical Cancer Prevention Issues in Depth, No. 2. 2004. http://www.path.org/publications/files/RH_supporting_women_iid.pdf. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

61. PPPU – Public Private Partnership Unit of the Kenya National Treasury. Public Private Partnership Act. 2013). http://www.pppunit.go.ke/news/view/public-private-partneship-act-2013. Accessed 14 Apr 2016.

62. Rusling J, Kumar C, Gutkind J, Patele V. Measurement of biomarker proteins for point-of-care early detection and monitoring of cancer. Analyst. 2010;135(10):2496–511.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

63. Goldie SJ, Kim JJ, Myers E. Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening in five developing countries. Vaccine. 2006;S3:164–S3/170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Page 2

Skip to main content

From: Using a multimethod approach to develop implementation strategies for a cervical self-sampling program in Kenya