Qualitative + Mixed Methods · COREQ + SRQR compliant · Saturation-aware

Design Rigorous Qualitative Studies
From Lived Experience to Protocol

22 qualitative, mixed-methods and action-research designs. 13-section workflow with philosophical lens, saturation planning, and Lincoln & Guba trustworthiness built in.

Try the workflowSee how it works
No credit card to start7-day money back15,000 Mindful AI Tokens/month
qual.rsminds.com / workflow
01Idea & Qual Subtype
05Philosophical Lens
08Data Collection Design
09Data Saturation
12Trustworthiness & Rigor
+ 8 more sections — see full workflow below
0

qualitative + mixed designs covered

0

workflow sections — idea to protocol

0

COREQ + SRQR reporting standards aligned

₹0/mo

starts here · 7-day money back

How QualMinds works

The 13-section workflow

Each section is its own AI-assisted accordion. The chain adapts — pure qualitative skips integration; mixed methods unlocks it. Your philosophical lens flows forward into every decision.

01

Idea & Qual Subtype

Inputs

Research idea text

AI action

predictQualSubtype

Output

Subtype + category across 22 qualitative, mixed and action designs.

Saves 30–60 min of paradigm-fit deliberation
02

PICo / PICO Framework

Inputs

Subtype context

AI action

suggestChips + PICo extraction

Output

Population / Interest / Context (and PICO for mixed strands).

Saves 1–2 hours of framework structuring
03

Research Question & FINER

Inputs

PICo

AI action

draftQualQuestion + auditResearchQuestion

Output

3 question drafts (standard, academic, impact) + FINER scoring.

Saves 2–3 hours vs manual drafting
04

Research Propositions

Inputs

QuestionSubtype

AI action

generateResearchPropositions

Output

Propositions + primary / secondary objectives (plus H1/H0 for mixed).

Saves ~1 hour and aligns objectives with paradigm
05

Philosophical Lens

Inputs

SubtypePropositions

AI action

generatePhilosophicalLens

Output

Paradigm, ontology, epistemology, axiology + methodological implications.

Saves 3–5 hours of philosophical justification work
06

Theory & Framework

Inputs

QuestionPhilosophical lens

AI action

discoverTheories + generateFramework

Output

Theory candidates with citations + conceptual framework diagram.

Saves 3–5 hours of literature triangulation
07

Participants & Access

Inputs

SubtypeContext

AI action

suggestChips (sampling + access)

Output

Purposive / theoretical / snowball criteria + gatekeeper plan.

Saves 1–2 hours of sampling-strategy design
08

Data Collection Design

Inputs

ParticipantsPhilosophical lens

AI action

designDataCollection

Output

Methods (interviews, FGD, observation, docs) + thematic interview guide.

Saves 4–6 hours of instrument design
09

Data Saturation

Inputs

Data collection design

AI action

planSaturation

Output

Min/max participants + saturation indicators + justification.

Saves 1–2 hours and gives reviewer-defensible numbers
10

Analysis Approach

Inputs

SubtypeLensSaturation

AI action

generateQualAnalysisPlan

Output

Coding strategy + analytic phases + reflexivity + software (NVivo / Atlas.ti / Dedoose).

Saves 2–4 hours of analysis-plan writing
11

Integration Framework

Inputs

Quant + qual strands

AI action

designIntegrationFramework

Output

Mixed-methods only · timing, priority, joint display, meta-inferences.

Saves 2–3 hours of mixed-methods integration design
12

Trustworthiness & Rigor

Inputs

Analysis plan

AI action

generateTrustworthinessPlan

Output

Lincoln & Guba: credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability.

Saves 2–3 hours and matches what reviewers look for
13

Research Protocol

Inputs

All previous sections

AI action

generateQualProtocol (parallel SSE)

Output

COREQ + SRQR-aligned protocol — DOCX, PDF, Markdown.

Saves a full day of protocol drafting

Design coverage

22 designs — every paradigm covered

From grounded theory and IPA to convergent mixed methods and participatory action research. Each design gets its own philosophical-lens guidance, reporting standard, and saturation criteria.

Pure Qualitative

9 designs

  • Grounded Theory

    Inductive theory building from constant comparison.

  • Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis

    IPA — idiographic meaning of lived experience.

  • Phenomenological Study

    Essence of a phenomenon across participants.

  • Ethnographic Study

    Culture, fieldwork, thick description.

  • Narrative Inquiry

    Story-as-data with temporality and place.

  • Thematic Analysis

    Braun & Clarke six-phase pattern identification.

  • Discourse Analysis

    Language-in-use, power, and meaning making.

  • Conversation Analysis

    Turn-taking, sequence, and interactional order.

  • Framework Analysis

    Matrix-based, policy-oriented qualitative method.

Mixed Methods

5 designs

  • Concurrent Mixed Methods

    Quant + qual collected simultaneously.

  • Sequential Mixed Methods

    One strand informs the next.

  • Pragmatic Mixed Methods

    Question-driven, what-works pragmatism.

  • Transformative Mixed Methods

    Social-justice lens guiding mixing.

  • Participatory Mixed Methods

    Stakeholders co-design both strands.

Sequential & Multiphase

6 designs

  • Convergent Parallel

    Independent strands merged at interpretation.

  • Embedded Nested

    Supportive strand inside a dominant design.

  • Explanatory Sequential

    Quant first, qual explains the why.

  • Exploratory Sequential

    Qual builds the instrument; quant tests it.

  • Group Sequential

    Pre-planned interim looks across phases.

  • Multiphase Design

    Programme of studies, shared overarching aim.

Action Research

2 designs

  • Action Research

    Cycles of plan-act-observe-reflect for change.

  • Participatory Action Research

    PAR — community as co-researcher and beneficiary.

Compliance

Built on the standards
qualitative reviewers expect

Integrated

SRQR

Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (21 items)

Integrated

COREQ

Consolidated criteria for Reporting Qualitative research (32 items)

Integrated

JBI Qualitative

Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist

Integrated

ENTREQ

Enhancing transparency in reporting qualitative synthesis

Integrated

CASP-Qual

Critical Appraisal Skills Programme — qualitative

Integrated

MMAT 2018

Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool — quant + qual + mixed

Integrated

GRADE-CERQual

Confidence in evidence from qualitative reviews

Integrated

PRISMA-NMA-Qual

Qualitative evidence in network meta-analyses

Integrated

Lincoln & Guba

Trustworthiness — credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability

Integrated

COREQ-FGD

Focus group discussion reporting extension

Integrated

Tracy 8-Criteria

Worthy topic, rigour, sincerity, credibility, resonance, contribution, ethics, coherence

Integrated

Yardley

Sensitivity to context, commitment, rigour, transparency, impact

Your protocol is scored against every applicable qualitative standard in real time.

Why this matters

Saturation,
but with a defensible justification

Other tools

Tell you "15–20 participants." That's it.

When your reviewer asks how did you know you reached saturation?, generic estimates fall apart. There's no link to your philosophical lens, no indicators, no member checking or audit trail — and no path back if the design shifts.

QualMinds

AI suggests. Your lens validates.

Saturation criteria built in. Member checking, peer debriefing, and audit trail surfaced inside the design plan — so trustworthiness is woven into the protocol, not bolted on at write-up.

  • Saturation model picked from your philosophical lens (theoretical, data, code, meaning).
  • Lincoln & Guba: credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability scored.
  • Reflexivity, member checking, peer debriefing tracked across all 13 sections.
section 9 / saturation · phenomenological study

Min participants

N = 8

data saturation · in-depth interviews

Max participants

N = 15

meaning saturation cap

Lens-aligned

IPA

Idiographic — small N defensible

Plans

Simple pricing

7-day money-back guarantee

Access 1m

₹299/ 30 days

15,000 Mindful AI Tokens

  • All 22 qualitative + mixed designs
  • 13-section workflow
  • COREQ + SRQR exports
Choose Access 1m
Most popular

Access 2m

₹499/ 60 days
Save ₹99

15,000 Mindful AI Tokens / month

  • Everything in 1m
  • Priority AI throughput
  • Save ₹99 vs monthly
Choose Access 2m

Access 3m

₹699/ 90 days
Save ₹198

15,000 Mindful AI Tokens / month

  • Everything in 2m
  • Quarterly project cadence
  • Save ₹198 vs monthly
Choose Access 3m
Compare all plans

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

Common questions from qualitative researchers, supervisors, and IEC reviewers.

Do you support thematic analysis?

Yes — Braun & Clarke's six-phase reflexive thematic analysis is one of the 9 pure-qualitative designs, with a dedicated analysis plan, coding strategy, and reflexivity workflow.

What about NVivo, Atlas.ti, MAXQDA or Dedoose?

QualMinds helps you design the study and produce a COREQ/SRQR-aligned protocol. Your analysis plan names the software you will use (NVivo, Atlas.ti, MAXQDA, Dedoose, or manual) and structures the coding accordingly — but the platform does not run the QDA software for you.

Phenomenology vs IPA — which should I choose?

Both are offered. Descriptive Phenomenology surfaces the essence of a phenomenon across participants; Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) is idiographic and stays close to the lived experience of each case. The platform recommends one based on your research idea and philosophical lens.

How do you handle reflexivity?

Reflexivity is woven into Section 10 (Analysis Approach) and Section 12 (Trustworthiness & Rigor). You document positionality, preconceptions, and decision points so reviewers see the audit trail in your protocol.

How do you justify saturation?

Section 9 (Data Saturation) picks a model that fits your lens — data saturation, code saturation, meaning saturation, or theoretical saturation — with min/max participants and explicit indicators you can defend.

Can I run a mixed-methods study?

Yes. 5 mixed-methods designs + 6 sequential / multiphase designs are first-class. The integration framework section unlocks for mixed designs (timing, priority, joint display, meta-inferences), and PICO replaces PICo for the quantitative strand.

Does it work for action research and PAR?

Yes — Action Research and Participatory Action Research are supported. The workflow adapts to the cyclical plan-act-observe-reflect rhythm, and the trustworthiness section emphasises stakeholder validation and democratic ownership.

Will my ethics committee accept the protocol?

Output aligns with SRQR (21 items) and COREQ (32 items) — the standards Indian IECs and international ethics boards expect. You retain full editorial control before export to DOCX, PDF, or Markdown.

Can I import an existing synopsis or interview guide?

Yes. Paste in any existing text and the tool extracts your research question, design, participants, and analysis approach to continue from where you left off — no re-typing.

Do you store my interview data?

No. QualMinds is a design tool — we never ask for or store transcripts, recordings, or participant data. Your study design stays in your account; PII is redacted before any AI call; exports are yours to keep after cancellation.

Start your qualitative design in 5 minutes.

1 free AI call. No credit card. Sign in with Google.

Try the workflow