This lesson introduces these two broad approaches, with specific attention to their use and interpretation in the context of Health Technology Assessment (HTA). 

📊

Quantitative

Focused on numerical data and statistical analysis 

Quantitative research, as its name implies, is concerned with quantifying results of observations/measurements and is research that generates numerical data or data that can be converted into numbers. Quantitative data is any data that comes from an objective measurement such as cholesterol level in a blood sample, or number of individuals aged 18 to 25 in a sample.

In health technology development, the most common form of quantitative research involves experiments, particularly:

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) – considered the gold standard

  • These trials compare the effects of a new health technology against: 
    • Other treatments (comparators, typically the standard of care)
    • Or, in some cases, placebo-controlled (no treatment)
  • Participants in these trials may be assessed through: 
    • Objective clinical endpoints (e.g., blood pressure, tumour size)
    • Adverse events (unintended side effects)
    • Subjective measures (e.g., pain levels, quality of life scores using scales)

It is assumed that these observations are a fair reflection of reality and are predictive of the future. For example, if a new medicine reduces heart attacks compared with an alternative treatment in repeated experiments, it is assumed that this will likely happen in similar patients with the same type of medicine in the real world situation, as opposed to the more controlled conditions in a clinical trial. 

📝

Qualitative

Focused on exploring perspectives, experiences, and meanings 

Measuring and analysing events in quantitative research (e.g., a clinical trial) can help us to predict what might happen in the future. However, this provides little information about feelings or motivations or other factors such as:

  • Social or cultural values or arrangements;
  • Patient-doctor relationships;
  • Stigma;
  • Conflict with religious or cultural views.

For example, a new contraceptive technology may avoid pregnancy, but this might not be desirable in populations who have strong cultural or religious motivations to have children. To understand how desirable the contraceptive technology is to its users and society, it must be studied using a different research approach. This is where qualitative research is valuable. 

Qualitative research has been described as “a systematic, subjective approach to describe life experiences and give them meaning” (1). 

It is primarily exploratory and seeks to uncover underlying reasons, beliefs, or motivations. It provides valuable insights into attitudes and behaviours, and can also help generate hypotheses for future quantitative research. 

While an individual patient may believe that payers should fund a particular treatment, decision-makers must balance such views against broader considerations, such as budget constraints, societal needs, and equity in healthcare. Qualitative research helps to examine whether individual perspectives align with societal ones. 

Key features of qualitative research:
  • Helps understand how or why a population might adopt—or resist—a new health technology or how they might feel about using it.
  • Uses unstructured or semi-structured methods:
    • Focus groups, Individual interviews, Participation/Observations, Document analysis or other written sources
  • Employs small, purposive samples selected based on specific criteria.
  • Focuses on the meaning behind behaviours and decisions rather than numerical outcomes.
  • Insights are context-dependent and may not be generalisable.

 While it does not produce measurable or countable data in the traditional sense, qualitative research plays a crucial role in understanding how people think, feel, and behave in relation to health technologies—filling important gaps left by quantitative approaches.