Table 2.

Quantitative and qualitative methods used for data integration

	Pragmatic randomized controlled trial [19]	Semi-structured interviews [20]	Content analysis of patient records [21]
Method	Quantitative	Qualitative	Quantitative
Aim	Evaluation of patient outcomes	Evaluation of patient outcomes	Evaluation of implementation fidelity
Dimension	SCNS-34 SF-dimension health system and information needs SCNS-34- SF–dimensions (psychological, physical and daily living, patient care and support), distress (distress-thermometer), quality of life (SeiQol, Fact-L), anxiety and depression (PHQ4)	Semi-structured interview guide: experiences with MCA, interprofessional tandem, conversation content, decision making, caregiver involvement	Self-developed fidelity checklist on six general topics (therapy, patient preferences, physical condition, psychological condition, organization, complementary medicine)
Inclusion criteria	Newly diagnosed stage IV lung cancer, limited prognosis (< 12 months median), sufficient command of the German language, at least 18 years old	Newly diagnosed stage IV lung cancer, limited prognosis (< 12 months median), sufficient command of the German language, at least 18 years old	All documents of the collection period were evaluated
Data source	Patients and caregivers	Patients and caregivers	Patient records
Data collection	Patients randomly assigned to MCA intervention (structured MCA conversation including nurse navigator follow-up contact) or standard oncological care. Randomization remained pragmatic because trained physicians were treating patients of both groups. Patients (n = 171) filled in questionnaires at baseline (t0), after three (t1), six (t2), and nine (t3) months	Face-to-face interviews with patients (n = 13) and caregivers (n = 12) of the MCA intervention group were conducted, digitally recorded, and transcribed verbatim	Routine patient records (133 milestone conversations, 54 follow-up calls) were collected by three MCA nurse navigators. In two observed periods, all patient records on MCA conversations and follow-ups were included in the analysis
Collection period	05/2018–04/2020	09/2018–04/2019	t1: 01/2018–05/2018 t2: 09/2018–10/2018
Previous data analysis	All measures were analyzed descriptively. Differences between groups were analyzed for the intention-to-treat population using linear models (baseline (t0) value as the independent variable)	Qualitative content analysis according to Mayring: summarizing the content, deductive line-by-line coding	For each record, incidences of the checklist were entered into a data matrix and descriptively analyzed
Data used for the Pillar integration process	Descriptive values	Transcripts were coded inductively according to Braun and Clarke [27]	Descriptive values

Abbreviations: MCA milestone communication approach, SCNS-34 SF supportive care needs survey—34-short form, SeiQol schedule for evaluation of individual quality of life, FACT-L functional assessment of cancer therapy—lung, PHQ-4 patient health questionnaire, UWE-IP University of the West of England Interprofessional Questionnaire