Willems, S; Saelens, D and Heylighen, A (2024) How to investigate differences in indoor environmental comfort and adaptation? Mixed methods research with patients. Building Research & Information, 52(8), pp. 851-869. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Ensuring hospitalized patients' comfort requires understanding differences in comfort and adaptation to discomfort, as well as the role of the built environment therein. Shortcomings in this understanding result from limitations of existing research methods. Therefore the potential of a mixed methods research design to investigate when and why experiences of and adaption to (dis)comfort differ among hospitalized patients was explored. A convergent mixed methods case study was conducted in two hospital wards of a Belgian hospital. Qualitative data included interviews with 19 patients about their experiences and information about the patients at the two wards during the fieldwork; quantitative data included sensor measurements of indoor environmental quality parameters (i.e. illuminance and indoor temperature), a questionnaire among 238 patients about their assessment of the indoor conditions, and simulations of these conditions. Joint displays allowed comparing situations in which characteristics related to the patients or their setting differed in an integrated way. The displays provide an intermediate step between purely qualitative descriptions of comfort and adaptation and purely quantitative models that predict both. Scenarios that the joint displays allow identifying inform about characteristics that could improve these models, and about roles of the built environment in experiences.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | adaptation; comfort; differences; hospitalized patients; mixed methods; interview; questionaire survey; indoor sensor data |
| Index terms: | interview, research design, mixed method, case study, illuminance, built environment, adaptation, questionnaire, indoor temperature, survey, comfort, discomfort, indoor environmental quality, sensor data |
| Subjects: | environmental health, research design and methodology, environmental science, occupational health and safety management, building performance, health risk and incident analysis, user focus, infrastructure and transport systems, research products and data, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Urban Studies, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Sustainability, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here