what is not an advantage of the case study method

Case Study Method – 18 Advantages and Disadvantages

The case study method uses investigatory research as a way to collect data about specific demographics. This approach can apply to individuals, businesses, groups, or events. Each participant receives an equal amount of participation, offering information for collection that can then find new insights into specific trends, ideas, of hypotheses.

Interviews and research observation are the two standard methods of data collection used when following the case study method.

Researchers initially developed the case study method to develop and support hypotheses in clinical medicine. The benefits found in these efforts led the approach to transition to other industries, allowing for the examination of results through proposed decisions, processes, or outcomes. Its unique approach to information makes it possible for others to glean specific points of wisdom that encourage growth.

Several case study method advantages and disadvantages can appear when researchers take this approach.

List of the Advantages of the Case Study Method

1. It requires an intensive study of a specific unit. Researchers must document verifiable data from direct observations when using the case study method. This work offers information about the input processes that go into the hypothesis under consideration. A casual approach to data-gathering work is not effective if a definitive outcome is desired. Each behavior, choice, or comment is a critical component that can verify or dispute the ideas being considered.

Intensive programs can require a significant amount of work for researchers, but it can also promote an improvement in the data collected. That means a hypothesis can receive immediate verification in some situations.

2. No sampling is required when following the case study method. This research method studies social units in their entire perspective instead of pulling individual data points out to analyze them. That means there is no sampling work required when using the case study method. The hypothesis under consideration receives support because it works to turn opinions into facts, verifying or denying the proposals that outside observers can use in the future.

Although researchers might pay attention to specific incidents or outcomes based on generalized behaviors or ideas, the study itself won’t sample those situations. It takes a look at the “bigger vision” instead.

3. This method offers a continuous analysis of the facts. The case study method will look at the facts continuously for the social group being studied by researchers. That means there aren’t interruptions in the process that could limit the validity of the data being collected through this work. This advantage reduces the need to use assumptions when drawing conclusions from the information, adding validity to the outcome of the study over time. That means the outcome becomes relevant to both sides of the equation as it can prove specific suppositions or invalidate a hypothesis under consideration.

This advantage can lead to inefficiencies because of the amount of data being studied by researchers. It is up to the individuals involved in the process to sort out what is useful and meaningful and what is not.

4. It is a useful approach to take when formulating a hypothesis. Researchers will use the case study method advantages to verify a hypothesis under consideration. It is not unusual for the collected data to lead people toward the formulation of new ideas after completing this work. This process encourages further study because it allows concepts to evolve as people do in social or physical environments. That means a complete data set can be gathered based on the skills of the researcher and the honesty of the individuals involved in the study itself.

Although this approach won’t develop a societal-level evaluation of a hypothesis, it can look at how specific groups will react in various circumstances. That information can lead to a better decision-making process in the future for everyone involved.

5. It provides an increase in knowledge. The case study method provides everyone with analytical power to increase knowledge. This advantage is possible because it uses a variety of methodologies to collect information while evaluating a hypothesis. Researchers prefer to use direct observation and interviews to complete their work, but it can also advantage through the use of questionnaires. Participants might need to fill out a journal or diary about their experiences that can be used to study behaviors or choices.

Some researchers incorporate memory tests and experimental tasks to determine how social groups will interact or respond in specific situations. All of this data then works to verify the possibilities that a hypothesis proposes.

6. The case study method allows for comparisons. The human experience is one that is built on individual observations from group situations. Specific demographics might think, act, or respond in particular ways to stimuli, but each person in that group will also contribute a small part to the whole. You could say that people are sponges that collect data from one another every day to create individual outcomes.

The case study method allows researchers to take the information from each demographic for comparison purposes. This information can then lead to proposals that support a hypothesis or lead to its disruption.

7. Data generalization is possible using the case study method. The case study method provides a foundation for data generalization, allowing researches to illustrate their statistical findings in meaningful ways. It puts the information into a usable format that almost anyone can use if they have the need to evaluate the hypothesis under consideration. This process makes it easier to discover unusual features, unique outcomes, or find conclusions that wouldn’t be available without this method. It does an excellent job of identifying specific concepts that relate to the proposed ideas that researchers were verifying through their work.

Generalization does not apply to a larger population group with the case study method. What researchers can do with this information is to suggest a predictable outcome when similar groups are placed in an equal situation.

8. It offers a comprehensive approach to research. Nothing gets ignored when using the case study method to collect information. Every person, place, or thing involved in the research receives the complete attention of those seeking data. The interactions are equal, which means the data is comprehensive and directly reflective of the group being observed.

This advantage means that there are fewer outliers to worry about when researching an idea, leading to a higher level of accuracy in the conclusions drawn by the researchers.

9. The identification of deviant cases is possible with this method. The case study method of research makes it easier to identify deviant cases that occur in each social group. These incidents are units (people) that behave in ways that go against the hypothesis under consideration. Instead of ignoring them like other options do when collecting data, this approach incorporates the “rogue” behavior to understand why it exists in the first place.

This advantage makes the eventual data and conclusions gathered more reliable because it incorporates the “alternative opinion” that exists. One might say that the case study method places as much emphasis on the yin as it does the yang so that the whole picture becomes available to the outside observer.

10. Questionnaire development is possible with the case study method. Interviews and direct observation are the preferred methods of implementing the case study method because it is cheap and done remotely. The information gathered by researchers can also lead to farming questionnaires that can farm additional data from those being studied. When all of the data resources come together, it is easier to formulate a conclusion that accurately reflects the demographics.

Some people in the case study method may try to manipulate the results for personal reasons, but this advantage makes it possible to identify this information readily. Then researchers can look into the thinking that goes into the dishonest behaviors observed.

List of the Disadvantages of the Case Study Method

1. The case study method offers limited representation. The usefulness of the case study method is limited to a specific group of representatives. Researchers are looking at a specific demographic when using this option. That means it is impossible to create any generalization that applies to the rest of society, an organization, or a larger community with this work. The findings can only apply to other groups caught in similar circumstances with the same experiences.

It is useful to use the case study method when attempting to discover the specific reasons why some people behave in a specific way. If researchers need something more generalized, then a different method must be used.

2. No classification is possible with the case study method. This disadvantage is also due to the sample size in the case study method. No classification is possible because researchers are studying such a small unit, group, or demographic. It can be an inefficient process since the skills of the researcher help to determine the quality of the data being collected to verify the validity of a hypothesis. Some participants may be unwilling to answer or participate, while others might try to guess at the outcome to support it.

Researchers can get trapped in a place where they explore more tangents than the actual hypothesis with this option. Classification can occur within the units being studied, but this data cannot extrapolate to other demographics.

3. The case study method still offers the possibility of errors. Each person has an unconscious bias that influences their behaviors and choices. The case study method can find outliers that oppose a hypothesis fairly easily thanks to its emphasis on finding facts, but it is up to the researchers to determine what information qualifies for this designation. If the results from the case study method are surprising or go against the opinion of participating individuals, then there is still the possibility that the information will not be 100% accurate.

Researchers must have controls in place that dictate how data gathering work occurs. Without this limitation in place, the results of the study cannot be guaranteed because of the presence of bias.

4. It is a subjective method to use for research. Although the purpose of the case study method of research is to gather facts, the foundation of what gets gathered is still based on opinion. It uses the subjective method instead of the objective one when evaluating data, which means there can be another layer of errors in the information to consider.

Imagine that a researcher interprets someone’s response as “angry” when performing direct observation, but the individual was feeling “shame” because of a decision they made. The difference between those two emotions is profound, and it could lead to information disruptions that could be problematic to the eventual work of hypothesis verification.

5. The processes required by the case study method are not useful for everyone. The case study method uses a person’s memories, explanations, and records from photographs and diaries to identify interactions on influences on psychological processes. People are given the chance to describe what happens in the world around them as a way for researchers to gather data. This process can be an advantage in some industries, but it can also be a worthless approach to some groups.

If the social group under study doesn’t have the information, knowledge, or wisdom to provide meaningful data, then the processes are no longer useful. Researchers must weigh the advantages and disadvantages of the case study method before starting their work to determine if the possibility of value exists. If it does not, then a different method may be necessary.

6. It is possible for bias to form in the data. It’s not just an unconscious bias that can form in the data when using the case study method. The narrow study approach can lead to outright discrimination in the data. Researchers can decide to ignore outliers or any other information that doesn’t support their hypothesis when using this method. The subjective nature of this approach makes it difficult to challenge the conclusions that get drawn from this work, and the limited pool of units (people) means that duplication is almost impossible.

That means unethical people can manipulate the results gathered by the case study method to their own advantage without much accountability in the process.

7. This method has no fixed limits to it. This method of research is highly dependent on situational circumstances rather than overarching societal or corporate truths. That means the researcher has no fixed limits of investigation. Even when controls are in place to limit bias or recommend specific activities, the case study method has enough flexibility built into its structures to allow for additional exploration. That means it is possible for this work to continue indefinitely, gathering data that never becomes useful.

Scientists began to track the health of 268 sophomores at Harvard in 1938. The Great Depression was in its final years at that point, so the study hoped to reveal clues that lead to happy and healthy lives. It continues still today, now incorporating the children of the original participants, providing over 80 years of information to sort through for conclusions.

8. The case study method is time-consuming and expensive. The case study method can be affordable in some situations, but the lack of fixed limits and the ability to pursue tangents can make it a costly process in most situations. It takes time to gather the data in the first place, and then researchers must interpret the information received so that they can use it for hypothesis evaluation. There are other methods of data collection that can be less expensive and provide results faster.

That doesn’t mean the case study method is useless. The individualization of results can help the decision-making process advance in a variety of industries successfully. It just takes more time to reach the appropriate conclusion, and that might be a resource that isn’t available.

The advantages and disadvantages of the case study method suggest that the helpfulness of this research option depends on the specific hypothesis under consideration. When researchers have the correct skills and mindset to gather data accurately, then it can lead to supportive data that can verify ideas with tremendous accuracy.

This research method can also be used unethically to produce specific results that can be difficult to challenge.

When bias enters into the structure of the case study method, the processes become inefficient, inaccurate, and harmful to the hypothesis. That’s why great care must be taken when designing a study with this approach. It might be a labor-intensive way to develop conclusions, but the outcomes are often worth the investments needed.

10 Case Study Advantages and Disadvantages

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

Learn about our Editorial Process

A case study in academic research is a detailed and in-depth examination of a specific instance or event, generally conducted through a qualitative approach to data.

The most common case study definition that I come across is is Robert K. Yin’s (2003, p. 13) quote provided below:

“An empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident.”

Researchers conduct case studies for a number of reasons, such as to explore complex phenomena within their real-life context, to look at a particularly interesting instance of a situation, or to dig deeper into something of interest identified in a wider-scale project.

While case studies render extremely interesting data, they have many limitations and are not suitable for all studies. One key limitation is that a case study’s findings are not usually generalizable to broader populations because one instance cannot be used to infer trends across populations.

Case Study Advantages and Disadvantages

1. in-depth analysis of complex phenomena.

Case study design allows researchers to delve deeply into intricate issues and situations.

By focusing on a specific instance or event, researchers can uncover nuanced details and layers of understanding that might be missed with other research methods, especially large-scale survey studies.

As Lee and Saunders (2017) argue,

“It allows that particular event to be studies in detail so that its unique qualities may be identified.”

This depth of analysis can provide rich insights into the underlying factors and dynamics of the studied phenomenon.

2. Holistic Understanding

Building on the above point, case studies can help us to understand a topic holistically and from multiple angles.

This means the researcher isn’t restricted to just examining a topic by using a pre-determined set of questions, as with questionnaires. Instead, researchers can use qualitative methods to delve into the many different angles, perspectives, and contextual factors related to the case study.

We can turn to Lee and Saunders (2017) again, who notes that case study researchers “develop a deep, holistic understanding of a particular phenomenon” with the intent of deeply understanding the phenomenon.

3. Examination of rare and Unusual Phenomena

We need to use case study methods when we stumble upon “rare and unusual” (Lee & Saunders, 2017) phenomena that would tend to be seen as mere outliers in population studies.

Take, for example, a child genius. A population study of all children of that child’s age would merely see this child as an outlier in the dataset, and this child may even be removed in order to predict overall trends.

So, to truly come to an understanding of this child and get insights into the environmental conditions that led to this child’s remarkable cognitive development, we need to do an in-depth study of this child specifically – so, we’d use a case study.

4. Helps Reveal the Experiences of Marginalzied Groups

Just as rare and unsual cases can be overlooked in population studies, so too can the experiences, beliefs, and perspectives of marginalized groups.

As Lee and Saunders (2017) argue, “case studies are also extremely useful in helping the expression of the voices of people whose interests are often ignored.”

Take, for example, the experiences of minority populations as they navigate healthcare systems. This was for many years a “hidden” phenomenon, not examined by researchers. It took case study designs to truly reveal this phenomenon, which helped to raise practitioners’ awareness of the importance of cultural sensitivity in medicine.

5. Ideal in Situations where Researchers cannot Control the Variables

Experimental designs – where a study takes place in a lab or controlled environment – are excellent for determining cause and effect . But not all studies can take place in controlled environments (Tetnowski, 2015).

When we’re out in the field doing observational studies or similar fieldwork, we don’t have the freedom to isolate dependent and independent variables. We need to use alternate methods.

Case studies are ideal in such situations.

A case study design will allow researchers to deeply immerse themselves in a setting (potentially combining it with methods such as ethnography or researcher observation) in order to see how phenomena take place in real-life settings.

6. Supports the generation of new theories or hypotheses

While large-scale quantitative studies such as cross-sectional designs and population surveys are excellent at testing theories and hypotheses on a large scale, they need a hypothesis to start off with!

This is where case studies – in the form of grounded research – come in. Often, a case study doesn’t start with a hypothesis. Instead, it ends with a hypothesis based upon the findings within a singular setting.

The deep analysis allows for hypotheses to emerge, which can then be taken to larger-scale studies in order to conduct further, more generalizable, testing of the hypothesis or theory.

7. Reveals the Unexpected

When a largescale quantitative research project has a clear hypothesis that it will test, it often becomes very rigid and has tunnel-vision on just exploring the hypothesis.

Of course, a structured scientific examination of the effects of specific interventions targeted at specific variables is extermely valuable.

But narrowly-focused studies often fail to shine a spotlight on unexpected and emergent data. Here, case studies come in very useful. Oftentimes, researchers set their eyes on a phenomenon and, when examining it closely with case studies, identify data and come to conclusions that are unprecedented, unforeseen, and outright surprising.

As Lars Meier (2009, p. 975) marvels, “where else can we become a part of foreign social worlds and have the chance to become aware of the unexpected?”

Disadvantages

1. not usually generalizable.

Case studies are not generalizable because they tend not to look at a broad enough corpus of data to be able to infer that there is a trend across a population.

As Yang (2022) argues, “by definition, case studies can make no claims to be typical.”

Case studies focus on one specific instance of a phenomenon. They explore the context, nuances, and situational factors that have come to bear on the case study. This is really useful for bringing to light important, new, and surprising information, as I’ve already covered.

But , it’s not often useful for generating data that has validity beyond the specific case study being examined.

2. Subjectivity in interpretation

Case studies usually (but not always) use qualitative data which helps to get deep into a topic and explain it in human terms, finding insights unattainable by quantitative data.

But qualitative data in case studies relies heavily on researcher interpretation. While researchers can be trained and work hard to focus on minimizing subjectivity (through methods like triangulation), it often emerges – some might argue it’s innevitable in qualitative studies.

So, a criticism of case studies could be that they’re more prone to subjectivity – and researchers need to take strides to address this in their studies.

3. Difficulty in replicating results

Case study research is often non-replicable because the study takes place in complex real-world settings where variables are not controlled.

So, when returning to a setting to re-do or attempt to replicate a study, we often find that the variables have changed to such an extent that replication is difficult. Furthermore, new researchers (with new subjective eyes) may catch things that the other readers overlooked.

Replication is even harder when researchers attempt to replicate a case study design in a new setting or with different participants.

Comprehension Quiz for Students

Question 1: What benefit do case studies offer when exploring the experiences of marginalized groups?

a) They provide generalizable data. b) They help express the voices of often-ignored individuals. c) They control all variables for the study. d) They always start with a clear hypothesis.

Question 2: Why might case studies be considered ideal for situations where researchers cannot control all variables?

a) They provide a structured scientific examination. b) They allow for generalizability across populations. c) They focus on one specific instance of a phenomenon. d) They allow for deep immersion in real-life settings.

Question 3: What is a primary disadvantage of case studies in terms of data applicability?

a) They always focus on the unexpected. b) They are not usually generalizable. c) They support the generation of new theories. d) They provide a holistic understanding.

Question 4: Why might case studies be considered more prone to subjectivity?

a) They always use quantitative data. b) They heavily rely on researcher interpretation, especially with qualitative data. c) They are always replicable. d) They look at a broad corpus of data.

Question 5: In what situations are experimental designs, such as those conducted in labs, most valuable?

a) When there’s a need to study rare and unusual phenomena. b) When a holistic understanding is required. c) When determining cause-and-effect relationships. d) When the study focuses on marginalized groups.

Question 6: Why is replication challenging in case study research?

a) Because they always use qualitative data. b) Because they tend to focus on a broad corpus of data. c) Due to the changing variables in complex real-world settings. d) Because they always start with a hypothesis.

Lee, B., & Saunders, M. N. K. (2017). Conducting Case Study Research for Business and Management Students. SAGE Publications.

Meir, L. (2009). Feasting on the Benefits of Case Study Research. In Mills, A. J., Wiebe, E., & Durepos, G. (Eds.). Encyclopedia of Case Study Research (Vol. 2). London: SAGE Publications.

Tetnowski, J. (2015). Qualitative case study research design.  Perspectives on fluency and fluency disorders ,  25 (1), 39-45. ( Source )

Yang, S. L. (2022). The War on Corruption in China: Local Reform and Innovation . Taylor & Francis.

Yin, R. (2003). Case Study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 25 Number Games for Kids (Free and Easy)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 25 Word Games for Kids (Free and Easy)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 25 Outdoor Games for Kids
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 50 Incentives to Give to Students

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Home » Pros and Cons » 12 Case Study Method Advantages and Disadvantages

12 Case Study Method Advantages and Disadvantages

A case study is an investigation into an individual circumstance. The investigation may be of a single person, business, event, or group. The investigation involves collecting in-depth data about the individual entity through the use of several collection methods. Interviews and observation are two of the most common forms of data collection used.

The case study method was originally developed in the field of clinical medicine. It has expanded since to other industries to examine key results, either positive or negative, that were received through a specific set of decisions. This allows for the topic to be researched with great detail, allowing others to glean knowledge from the information presented.

Here are the advantages and disadvantages of using the case study method.

List of the Advantages of the Case Study Method

1. it turns client observations into useable data..

Case studies offer verifiable data from direct observations of the individual entity involved. These observations provide information about input processes. It can show the path taken which led to specific results being generated. Those observations make it possible for others, in similar circumstances, to potentially replicate the results discovered by the case study method.

2. It turns opinion into fact.

Case studies provide facts to study because you’re looking at data which was generated in real-time. It is a way for researchers to turn their opinions into information that can be verified as fact because there is a proven path of positive or negative development. Singling out a specific incident also provides in-depth details about the path of development, which gives it extra credibility to the outside observer.

3. It is relevant to all parties involved.

Case studies that are chosen well will be relevant to everyone who is participating in the process. Because there is such a high level of relevance involved, researchers are able to stay actively engaged in the data collection process. Participants are able to further their knowledge growth because there is interest in the outcome of the case study. Most importantly, the case study method essentially forces people to make a decision about the question being studied, then defend their position through the use of facts.

4. It uses a number of different research methodologies.

The case study method involves more than just interviews and direct observation. Case histories from a records database can be used with this method. Questionnaires can be distributed to participants in the entity being studies. Individuals who have kept diaries and journals about the entity being studied can be included. Even certain experimental tasks, such as a memory test, can be part of this research process.

5. It can be done remotely.

Researchers do not need to be present at a specific location or facility to utilize the case study method. Research can be obtained over the phone, through email, and other forms of remote communication. Even interviews can be conducted over the phone. That means this method is good for formative research that is exploratory in nature, even if it must be completed from a remote location.

6. It is inexpensive.

Compared to other methods of research, the case study method is rather inexpensive. The costs associated with this method involve accessing data, which can often be done for free. Even when there are in-person interviews or other on-site duties involved, the costs of reviewing the data are minimal.

7. It is very accessible to readers.

The case study method puts data into a usable format for those who read the data and note its outcome. Although there may be perspectives of the researcher included in the outcome, the goal of this method is to help the reader be able to identify specific concepts to which they also relate. That allows them to discover unusual features within the data, examine outliers that may be present, or draw conclusions from their own experiences.

List of the Disadvantages of the Case Study Method

1. it can have influence factors within the data..

Every person has their own unconscious bias. Although the case study method is designed to limit the influence of this bias by collecting fact-based data, it is the collector of the data who gets to define what is a “fact” and what is not. That means the real-time data being collected may be based on the results the researcher wants to see from the entity instead. By controlling how facts are collected, a research can control the results this method generates.

2. It takes longer to analyze the data.

The information collection process through the case study method takes much longer to collect than other research options. That is because there is an enormous amount of data which must be sifted through. It’s not just the researchers who can influence the outcome in this type of research method. Participants can also influence outcomes by given inaccurate or incomplete answers to questions they are asked. Researchers must verify the information presented to ensure its accuracy, and that takes time to complete.

3. It can be an inefficient process.

Case study methods require the participation of the individuals or entities involved for it to be a successful process. That means the skills of the researcher will help to determine the quality of information that is being received. Some participants may be quiet, unwilling to answer even basic questions about what is being studied. Others may be overly talkative, exploring tangents which have nothing to do with the case study at all. If researchers are unsure of how to manage this process, then incomplete data is often collected.

4. It requires a small sample size to be effective.

The case study method requires a small sample size for it to yield an effective amount of data to be analyzed. If there are different demographics involved with the entity, or there are different needs which must be examined, then the case study method becomes very inefficient.

5. It is a labor-intensive method of data collection.

The case study method requires researchers to have a high level of language skills to be successful with data collection. Researchers must be personally involved in every aspect of collecting the data as well. From reviewing files or entries personally to conducting personal interviews, the concepts and themes of this process are heavily reliant on the amount of work each researcher is willing to put into things.

These case study method advantages and disadvantages offer a look at the effectiveness of this research option. With the right skill set, it can be used as an effective tool to gather rich, detailed information about specific entities. Without the right skill set, the case study method becomes inefficient and inaccurate.

Related Posts:

• 25 Best Ways to Overcome the Fear of Failure
• Monroe's Motivated Sequence Explained [with Examples]
• 21 Most Effective Bundle Pricing Strategies with Examples
• Force Field Analysis Explained with Examples

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods

What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods

Published on May 8, 2019 by Shona McCombes . Revised on November 20, 2023.

A case study is a detailed study of a specific subject, such as a person, group, place, event, organization, or phenomenon. Case studies are commonly used in social, educational, clinical, and business research.

A case study research design usually involves qualitative methods , but quantitative methods are sometimes also used. Case studies are good for describing , comparing, evaluating and understanding different aspects of a research problem .

Table of contents

When to do a case study, step 1: select a case, step 2: build a theoretical framework, step 3: collect your data, step 4: describe and analyze the case, other interesting articles.

A case study is an appropriate research design when you want to gain concrete, contextual, in-depth knowledge about a specific real-world subject. It allows you to explore the key characteristics, meanings, and implications of the case.

Case studies are often a good choice in a thesis or dissertation . They keep your project focused and manageable when you don’t have the time or resources to do large-scale research.

You might use just one complex case study where you explore a single subject in depth, or conduct multiple case studies to compare and illuminate different aspects of your research problem.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Once you have developed your problem statement and research questions , you should be ready to choose the specific case that you want to focus on. A good case study should have the potential to:

• Provide new or unexpected insights into the subject
• Challenge or complicate existing assumptions and theories
• Propose practical courses of action to resolve a problem
• Open up new directions for future research

TipIf your research is more practical in nature and aims to simultaneously investigate an issue as you solve it, consider conducting action research instead.

Unlike quantitative or experimental research , a strong case study does not require a random or representative sample. In fact, case studies often deliberately focus on unusual, neglected, or outlying cases which may shed new light on the research problem.

Example of an outlying case studyIn the 1960s the town of Roseto, Pennsylvania was discovered to have extremely low rates of heart disease compared to the US average. It became an important case study for understanding previously neglected causes of heart disease.

However, you can also choose a more common or representative case to exemplify a particular category, experience or phenomenon.

Example of a representative case studyIn the 1920s, two sociologists used Muncie, Indiana as a case study of a typical American city that supposedly exemplified the changing culture of the US at the time.

While case studies focus more on concrete details than general theories, they should usually have some connection with theory in the field. This way the case study is not just an isolated description, but is integrated into existing knowledge about the topic. It might aim to:

• Exemplify a theory by showing how it explains the case under investigation
• Expand on a theory by uncovering new concepts and ideas that need to be incorporated
• Challenge a theory by exploring an outlier case that doesn’t fit with established assumptions

To ensure that your analysis of the case has a solid academic grounding, you should conduct a literature review of sources related to the topic and develop a theoretical framework . This means identifying key concepts and theories to guide your analysis and interpretation.

There are many different research methods you can use to collect data on your subject. Case studies tend to focus on qualitative data using methods such as interviews , observations , and analysis of primary and secondary sources (e.g., newspaper articles, photographs, official records). Sometimes a case study will also collect quantitative data.

Example of a mixed methods case studyFor a case study of a wind farm development in a rural area, you could collect quantitative data on employment rates and business revenue, collect qualitative data on local people’s perceptions and experiences, and analyze local and national media coverage of the development.

The aim is to gain as thorough an understanding as possible of the case and its context.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

In writing up the case study, you need to bring together all the relevant aspects to give as complete a picture as possible of the subject.

How you report your findings depends on the type of research you are doing. Some case studies are structured like a standard scientific paper or thesis , with separate sections or chapters for the methods , results and discussion .

Others are written in a more narrative style, aiming to explore the case from various angles and analyze its meanings and implications (for example, by using textual analysis or discourse analysis ).

In all cases, though, make sure to give contextual details about the case, connect it back to the literature and theory, and discuss how it fits into wider patterns or debates.

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Normal distribution
• Degrees of freedom
• Null hypothesis
• Discourse analysis
• Control groups
• Mixed methods research
• Non-probability sampling
• Quantitative research
• Ecological validity

Research bias

• Rosenthal effect
• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Selection bias
• Negativity bias
• Status quo bias

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, November 20). What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods. Scribbr. Retrieved August 14, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/case-study/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, primary vs. secondary sources | difference & examples, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is action research | definition & examples, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

• Business Essentials
• Leadership & Management
• Credential of Leadership, Impact, and Management in Business (CLIMB)
• Entrepreneurship & Innovation
• Digital Transformation
• Finance & Accounting
• Business in Society
• For Organizations
• Support Portal
• Media Coverage
• Founding Donors
• Leadership Team

• Harvard Business School →
• HBS Online →
• Business Insights →

Business Insights

Harvard Business School Online's Business Insights Blog provides the career insights you need to achieve your goals and gain confidence in your business skills.

• Career Development
• Communication
• Decision-Making
• Earning Your MBA
• Negotiation
• News & Events
• Productivity
• Staff Spotlight
• Student Profiles
• Work-Life Balance
• AI Essentials for Business
• Alternative Investments
• Business Analytics
• Business Strategy
• Business and Climate Change
• Creating Brand Value
• Design Thinking and Innovation
• Digital Marketing Strategy
• Disruptive Strategy
• Economics for Managers
• Entrepreneurship Essentials
• Financial Accounting
• Global Business
• Launching Tech Ventures
• Leadership Principles
• Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability
• Leading Change and Organizational Renewal
• Leading with Finance
• Management Essentials
• Negotiation Mastery
• Organizational Leadership
• Power and Influence for Positive Impact
• Strategy Execution
• Sustainable Business Strategy
• Sustainable Investing
• Winning with Digital Platforms

5 Benefits of Learning Through the Case Study Method

• 28 Nov 2023

While several factors make HBS Online unique —including a global Community and real-world outcomes —active learning through the case study method rises to the top.

In a 2023 City Square Associates survey, 74 percent of HBS Online learners who also took a course from another provider said HBS Online’s case method and real-world examples were better by comparison.

Here’s a primer on the case method, five benefits you could gain, and how to experience it for yourself.

Access your free e-book today.

What Is the Harvard Business School Case Study Method?

The case study method , or case method , is a learning technique in which you’re presented with a real-world business challenge and asked how you’d solve it. After working through it yourself and with peers, you’re told how the scenario played out.

HBS pioneered the case method in 1922. Shortly before, in 1921, the first case was written.

“How do you go into an ambiguous situation and get to the bottom of it?” says HBS Professor Jan Rivkin, former senior associate dean and chair of HBS's master of business administration (MBA) program, in a video about the case method . “That skill—the skill of figuring out a course of inquiry to choose a course of action—that skill is as relevant today as it was in 1921.”

Originally developed for the in-person MBA classroom, HBS Online adapted the case method into an engaging, interactive online learning experience in 2014.

In HBS Online courses , you learn about each case from the business professional who experienced it. After reviewing their videos, you’re prompted to take their perspective and explain how you’d handle their situation.

You then get to read peers’ responses, “star” them, and comment to further the discussion. Afterward, you learn how the professional handled it and their key takeaways.

HBS Online’s adaptation of the case method incorporates the famed HBS “cold call,” in which you’re called on at random to make a decision without time to prepare.

“Learning came to life!” said Sheneka Balogun , chief administration officer and chief of staff at LeMoyne-Owen College, of her experience taking the Credential of Readiness (CORe) program . “The videos from the professors, the interactive cold calls where you were randomly selected to participate, and the case studies that enhanced and often captured the essence of objectives and learning goals were all embedded in each module. This made learning fun, engaging, and student-friendly.”

If you’re considering taking a course that leverages the case study method, here are five benefits you could experience.

5 Benefits of Learning Through Case Studies

1. take new perspectives.

The case method prompts you to consider a scenario from another person’s perspective. To work through the situation and come up with a solution, you must consider their circumstances, limitations, risk tolerance, stakeholders, resources, and potential consequences to assess how to respond.

Taking on new perspectives not only can help you navigate your own challenges but also others’. Putting yourself in someone else’s situation to understand their motivations and needs can go a long way when collaborating with stakeholders.

2. Hone Your Decision-Making Skills

Another skill you can build is the ability to make decisions effectively . The case study method forces you to use limited information to decide how to handle a problem—just like in the real world.

Throughout your career, you’ll need to make difficult decisions with incomplete or imperfect information—and sometimes, you won’t feel qualified to do so. Learning through the case method allows you to practice this skill in a low-stakes environment. When facing a real challenge, you’ll be better prepared to think quickly, collaborate with others, and present and defend your solution.

3. Become More Open-Minded

As you collaborate with peers on responses, it becomes clear that not everyone solves problems the same way. Exposing yourself to various approaches and perspectives can help you become a more open-minded professional.

When you’re part of a diverse group of learners from around the world, your experiences, cultures, and backgrounds contribute to a range of opinions on each case.

On the HBS Online course platform, you’re prompted to view and comment on others’ responses, and discussion is encouraged. This practice of considering others’ perspectives can make you more receptive in your career.

“You’d be surprised at how much you can learn from your peers,” said Ratnaditya Jonnalagadda , a software engineer who took CORe.

In addition to interacting with peers in the course platform, Jonnalagadda was part of the HBS Online Community , where he networked with other professionals and continued discussions sparked by course content.

“You get to understand your peers better, and students share examples of businesses implementing a concept from a module you just learned,” Jonnalagadda said. “It’s a very good way to cement the concepts in one's mind.”

4. Enhance Your Curiosity

One byproduct of taking on different perspectives is that it enables you to picture yourself in various roles, industries, and business functions.

“Each case offers an opportunity for students to see what resonates with them, what excites them, what bores them, which role they could imagine inhabiting in their careers,” says former HBS Dean Nitin Nohria in the Harvard Business Review . “Cases stimulate curiosity about the range of opportunities in the world and the many ways that students can make a difference as leaders.”

Through the case method, you can “try on” roles you may not have considered and feel more prepared to change or advance your career .

5. Build Your Self-Confidence

Finally, learning through the case study method can build your confidence. Each time you assume a business leader’s perspective, aim to solve a new challenge, and express and defend your opinions and decisions to peers, you prepare to do the same in your career.

According to a 2022 City Square Associates survey , 84 percent of HBS Online learners report feeling more confident making business decisions after taking a course.

“Self-confidence is difficult to teach or coach, but the case study method seems to instill it in people,” Nohria says in the Harvard Business Review . “There may well be other ways of learning these meta-skills, such as the repeated experience gained through practice or guidance from a gifted coach. However, under the direction of a masterful teacher, the case method can engage students and help them develop powerful meta-skills like no other form of teaching.”

How to Experience the Case Study Method

If the case method seems like a good fit for your learning style, experience it for yourself by taking an HBS Online course. Offerings span eight subject areas, including:

• Business essentials
• Leadership and management
• Entrepreneurship and innovation
• Digital transformation
• Finance and accounting
• Business in society

No matter which course or credential program you choose, you’ll examine case studies from real business professionals, work through their challenges alongside peers, and gain valuable insights to apply to your career.

Are you interested in discovering how HBS Online can help advance your career? Explore our course catalog and download our free guide —complete with interactive workbook sections—to determine if online learning is right for you and which course to take.

About the Author

• Privacy Policy

Home » Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Table of Contents

A case study is a research method that involves an in-depth examination and analysis of a particular phenomenon or case, such as an individual, organization, community, event, or situation.

It is a qualitative research approach that aims to provide a detailed and comprehensive understanding of the case being studied. Case studies typically involve multiple sources of data, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts, which are analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, and grounded theory. The findings of a case study are often used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Types of Case Study

Types and Methods of Case Study are as follows:

Single-Case Study

A single-case study is an in-depth analysis of a single case. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand a specific phenomenon in detail.

For Example , A researcher might conduct a single-case study on a particular individual to understand their experiences with a particular health condition or a specific organization to explore their management practices. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a single-case study are often used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Multiple-Case Study

A multiple-case study involves the analysis of several cases that are similar in nature. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to identify similarities and differences between the cases.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a multiple-case study on several companies to explore the factors that contribute to their success or failure. The researcher collects data from each case, compares and contrasts the findings, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as comparative analysis or pattern-matching. The findings of a multiple-case study can be used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Exploratory Case Study

An exploratory case study is used to explore a new or understudied phenomenon. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to generate hypotheses or theories about the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an exploratory case study on a new technology to understand its potential impact on society. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as grounded theory or content analysis. The findings of an exploratory case study can be used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Descriptive Case Study

A descriptive case study is used to describe a particular phenomenon in detail. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to provide a comprehensive account of the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a descriptive case study on a particular community to understand its social and economic characteristics. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a descriptive case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Instrumental Case Study

An instrumental case study is used to understand a particular phenomenon that is instrumental in achieving a particular goal. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand the role of the phenomenon in achieving the goal.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an instrumental case study on a particular policy to understand its impact on achieving a particular goal, such as reducing poverty. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of an instrumental case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Case Study Data Collection Methods

Here are some common data collection methods for case studies:

Interviews involve asking questions to individuals who have knowledge or experience relevant to the case study. Interviews can be structured (where the same questions are asked to all participants) or unstructured (where the interviewer follows up on the responses with further questions). Interviews can be conducted in person, over the phone, or through video conferencing.

Observations

Observations involve watching and recording the behavior and activities of individuals or groups relevant to the case study. Observations can be participant (where the researcher actively participates in the activities) or non-participant (where the researcher observes from a distance). Observations can be recorded using notes, audio or video recordings, or photographs.

Documents can be used as a source of information for case studies. Documents can include reports, memos, emails, letters, and other written materials related to the case study. Documents can be collected from the case study participants or from public sources.

Surveys involve asking a set of questions to a sample of individuals relevant to the case study. Surveys can be administered in person, over the phone, through mail or email, or online. Surveys can be used to gather information on attitudes, opinions, or behaviors related to the case study.

Artifacts are physical objects relevant to the case study. Artifacts can include tools, equipment, products, or other objects that provide insights into the case study phenomenon.

How to conduct Case Study Research

Conducting a case study research involves several steps that need to be followed to ensure the quality and rigor of the study. Here are the steps to conduct case study research:

• Define the research questions: The first step in conducting a case study research is to define the research questions. The research questions should be specific, measurable, and relevant to the case study phenomenon under investigation.
• Select the case: The next step is to select the case or cases to be studied. The case should be relevant to the research questions and should provide rich and diverse data that can be used to answer the research questions.
• Collect data: Data can be collected using various methods, such as interviews, observations, documents, surveys, and artifacts. The data collection method should be selected based on the research questions and the nature of the case study phenomenon.
• Analyze the data: The data collected from the case study should be analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, or grounded theory. The analysis should be guided by the research questions and should aim to provide insights and conclusions relevant to the research questions.
• Draw conclusions: The conclusions drawn from the case study should be based on the data analysis and should be relevant to the research questions. The conclusions should be supported by evidence and should be clearly stated.
• Validate the findings: The findings of the case study should be validated by reviewing the data and the analysis with participants or other experts in the field. This helps to ensure the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Write the report: The final step is to write the report of the case study research. The report should provide a clear description of the case study phenomenon, the research questions, the data collection methods, the data analysis, the findings, and the conclusions. The report should be written in a clear and concise manner and should follow the guidelines for academic writing.

Examples of Case Study

Here are some examples of case study research:

• The Hawthorne Studies : Conducted between 1924 and 1932, the Hawthorne Studies were a series of case studies conducted by Elton Mayo and his colleagues to examine the impact of work environment on employee productivity. The studies were conducted at the Hawthorne Works plant of the Western Electric Company in Chicago and included interviews, observations, and experiments.
• The Stanford Prison Experiment: Conducted in 1971, the Stanford Prison Experiment was a case study conducted by Philip Zimbardo to examine the psychological effects of power and authority. The study involved simulating a prison environment and assigning participants to the role of guards or prisoners. The study was controversial due to the ethical issues it raised.
• The Challenger Disaster: The Challenger Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Space Shuttle Challenger explosion in 1986. The study included interviews, observations, and analysis of data to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.
• The Enron Scandal: The Enron Scandal was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Enron Corporation’s bankruptcy in 2001. The study included interviews, analysis of financial data, and review of documents to identify the accounting practices, corporate culture, and ethical issues that led to the company’s downfall.
• The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster : The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the nuclear accident that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan in 2011. The study included interviews, analysis of data, and review of documents to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.

Application of Case Study

Case studies have a wide range of applications across various fields and industries. Here are some examples:

Business and Management

Case studies are widely used in business and management to examine real-life situations and develop problem-solving skills. Case studies can help students and professionals to develop a deep understanding of business concepts, theories, and best practices.

Case studies are used in healthcare to examine patient care, treatment options, and outcomes. Case studies can help healthcare professionals to develop critical thinking skills, diagnose complex medical conditions, and develop effective treatment plans.

Case studies are used in education to examine teaching and learning practices. Case studies can help educators to develop effective teaching strategies, evaluate student progress, and identify areas for improvement.

Social Sciences

Case studies are widely used in social sciences to examine human behavior, social phenomena, and cultural practices. Case studies can help researchers to develop theories, test hypotheses, and gain insights into complex social issues.

Law and Ethics

Case studies are used in law and ethics to examine legal and ethical dilemmas. Case studies can help lawyers, policymakers, and ethical professionals to develop critical thinking skills, analyze complex cases, and make informed decisions.

Purpose of Case Study

The purpose of a case study is to provide a detailed analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. A case study is a qualitative research method that involves the in-depth exploration and analysis of a particular case, which can be an individual, group, organization, event, or community.

The primary purpose of a case study is to generate a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the case, including its history, context, and dynamics. Case studies can help researchers to identify and examine the underlying factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and detailed understanding of the case, which can inform future research, practice, or policy.

Case studies can also serve other purposes, including:

• Illustrating a theory or concept: Case studies can be used to illustrate and explain theoretical concepts and frameworks, providing concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Developing hypotheses: Case studies can help to generate hypotheses about the causal relationships between different factors and outcomes, which can be tested through further research.
• Providing insight into complex issues: Case studies can provide insights into complex and multifaceted issues, which may be difficult to understand through other research methods.
• Informing practice or policy: Case studies can be used to inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.

Advantages of Case Study Research

There are several advantages of case study research, including:

• In-depth exploration: Case study research allows for a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. This can provide a comprehensive understanding of the case and its dynamics, which may not be possible through other research methods.
• Rich data: Case study research can generate rich and detailed data, including qualitative data such as interviews, observations, and documents. This can provide a nuanced understanding of the case and its complexity.
• Holistic perspective: Case study research allows for a holistic perspective of the case, taking into account the various factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the case.
• Theory development: Case study research can help to develop and refine theories and concepts by providing empirical evidence and concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Practical application: Case study research can inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.
• Contextualization: Case study research takes into account the specific context in which the case is situated, which can help to understand how the case is influenced by the social, cultural, and historical factors of its environment.

Limitations of Case Study Research

There are several limitations of case study research, including:

• Limited generalizability : Case studies are typically focused on a single case or a small number of cases, which limits the generalizability of the findings. The unique characteristics of the case may not be applicable to other contexts or populations, which may limit the external validity of the research.
• Biased sampling: Case studies may rely on purposive or convenience sampling, which can introduce bias into the sample selection process. This may limit the representativeness of the sample and the generalizability of the findings.
• Subjectivity: Case studies rely on the interpretation of the researcher, which can introduce subjectivity into the analysis. The researcher’s own biases, assumptions, and perspectives may influence the findings, which may limit the objectivity of the research.
• Limited control: Case studies are typically conducted in naturalistic settings, which limits the control that the researcher has over the environment and the variables being studied. This may limit the ability to establish causal relationships between variables.
• Time-consuming: Case studies can be time-consuming to conduct, as they typically involve a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific case. This may limit the feasibility of conducting multiple case studies or conducting case studies in a timely manner.
• Resource-intensive: Case studies may require significant resources, including time, funding, and expertise. This may limit the ability of researchers to conduct case studies in resource-constrained settings.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Focus Groups – Steps, Examples and Guide

Correlational Research – Methods, Types and...

Observational Research – Methods and Guide

Qualitative Research Methods

Experimental Design – Types, Methods, Guide

Qualitative Research – Methods, Analysis Types...

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods

Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods

Published on 5 May 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 30 January 2023.

A case study is a detailed study of a specific subject, such as a person, group, place, event, organisation, or phenomenon. Case studies are commonly used in social, educational, clinical, and business research.

A case study research design usually involves qualitative methods , but quantitative methods are sometimes also used. Case studies are good for describing , comparing, evaluating, and understanding different aspects of a research problem .

Table of contents

When to do a case study, step 1: select a case, step 2: build a theoretical framework, step 3: collect your data, step 4: describe and analyse the case.

A case study is an appropriate research design when you want to gain concrete, contextual, in-depth knowledge about a specific real-world subject. It allows you to explore the key characteristics, meanings, and implications of the case.

Case studies are often a good choice in a thesis or dissertation . They keep your project focused and manageable when you don’t have the time or resources to do large-scale research.

You might use just one complex case study where you explore a single subject in depth, or conduct multiple case studies to compare and illuminate different aspects of your research problem.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Once you have developed your problem statement and research questions , you should be ready to choose the specific case that you want to focus on. A good case study should have the potential to:

• Provide new or unexpected insights into the subject
• Challenge or complicate existing assumptions and theories
• Propose practical courses of action to resolve a problem
• Open up new directions for future research

Unlike quantitative or experimental research, a strong case study does not require a random or representative sample. In fact, case studies often deliberately focus on unusual, neglected, or outlying cases which may shed new light on the research problem.

If you find yourself aiming to simultaneously investigate and solve an issue, consider conducting action research . As its name suggests, action research conducts research and takes action at the same time, and is highly iterative and flexible. 

However, you can also choose a more common or representative case to exemplify a particular category, experience, or phenomenon.

While case studies focus more on concrete details than general theories, they should usually have some connection with theory in the field. This way the case study is not just an isolated description, but is integrated into existing knowledge about the topic. It might aim to:

• Exemplify a theory by showing how it explains the case under investigation
• Expand on a theory by uncovering new concepts and ideas that need to be incorporated
• Challenge a theory by exploring an outlier case that doesn’t fit with established assumptions

To ensure that your analysis of the case has a solid academic grounding, you should conduct a literature review of sources related to the topic and develop a theoretical framework . This means identifying key concepts and theories to guide your analysis and interpretation.

There are many different research methods you can use to collect data on your subject. Case studies tend to focus on qualitative data using methods such as interviews, observations, and analysis of primary and secondary sources (e.g., newspaper articles, photographs, official records). Sometimes a case study will also collect quantitative data .

The aim is to gain as thorough an understanding as possible of the case and its context.

In writing up the case study, you need to bring together all the relevant aspects to give as complete a picture as possible of the subject.

How you report your findings depends on the type of research you are doing. Some case studies are structured like a standard scientific paper or thesis, with separate sections or chapters for the methods , results , and discussion .

Others are written in a more narrative style, aiming to explore the case from various angles and analyse its meanings and implications (for example, by using textual analysis or discourse analysis ).

In all cases, though, make sure to give contextual details about the case, connect it back to the literature and theory, and discuss how it fits into wider patterns or debates.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, January 30). Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods. Scribbr. Retrieved 12 August 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/case-studies/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, correlational research | guide, design & examples, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples, descriptive research design | definition, methods & examples.

The Ultimate Guide to Qualitative Research - Part 1: The Basics

• Introduction and overview
• What is qualitative research?
• What is qualitative data?
• Examples of qualitative data
• Qualitative vs. quantitative research
• Mixed methods
• Qualitative research preparation
• Theoretical perspective
• Theoretical framework
• Literature reviews

Research question

• Conceptual framework
• Conceptual vs. theoretical framework

Data collection

• Qualitative research methods
• Focus groups
• Observational research

What is a case study?

Applications for case study research, what is a good case study, process of case study design, benefits and limitations of case studies.

• Ethnographical research
• Ethical considerations
• Confidentiality and privacy
• Power dynamics
• Reflexivity

Case studies

Case studies are essential to qualitative research , offering a lens through which researchers can investigate complex phenomena within their real-life contexts. This chapter explores the concept, purpose, applications, examples, and types of case studies and provides guidance on how to conduct case study research effectively.

Whereas quantitative methods look at phenomena at scale, case study research looks at a concept or phenomenon in considerable detail. While analyzing a single case can help understand one perspective regarding the object of research inquiry, analyzing multiple cases can help obtain a more holistic sense of the topic or issue. Let's provide a basic definition of a case study, then explore its characteristics and role in the qualitative research process.

Definition of a case study

A case study in qualitative research is a strategy of inquiry that involves an in-depth investigation of a phenomenon within its real-world context. It provides researchers with the opportunity to acquire an in-depth understanding of intricate details that might not be as apparent or accessible through other methods of research. The specific case or cases being studied can be a single person, group, or organization – demarcating what constitutes a relevant case worth studying depends on the researcher and their research question .

Among qualitative research methods , a case study relies on multiple sources of evidence, such as documents, artifacts, interviews , or observations , to present a complete and nuanced understanding of the phenomenon under investigation. The objective is to illuminate the readers' understanding of the phenomenon beyond its abstract statistical or theoretical explanations.

Characteristics of case studies

Case studies typically possess a number of distinct characteristics that set them apart from other research methods. These characteristics include a focus on holistic description and explanation, flexibility in the design and data collection methods, reliance on multiple sources of evidence, and emphasis on the context in which the phenomenon occurs.

Furthermore, case studies can often involve a longitudinal examination of the case, meaning they study the case over a period of time. These characteristics allow case studies to yield comprehensive, in-depth, and richly contextualized insights about the phenomenon of interest.

The role of case studies in research

Case studies hold a unique position in the broader landscape of research methods aimed at theory development. They are instrumental when the primary research interest is to gain an intensive, detailed understanding of a phenomenon in its real-life context.

In addition, case studies can serve different purposes within research - they can be used for exploratory, descriptive, or explanatory purposes, depending on the research question and objectives. This flexibility and depth make case studies a valuable tool in the toolkit of qualitative researchers.

Remember, a well-conducted case study can offer a rich, insightful contribution to both academic and practical knowledge through theory development or theory verification, thus enhancing our understanding of complex phenomena in their real-world contexts.

What is the purpose of a case study?

Case study research aims for a more comprehensive understanding of phenomena, requiring various research methods to gather information for qualitative analysis . Ultimately, a case study can allow the researcher to gain insight into a particular object of inquiry and develop a theoretical framework relevant to the research inquiry.

Why use case studies in qualitative research?

Using case studies as a research strategy depends mainly on the nature of the research question and the researcher's access to the data.

Conducting case study research provides a level of detail and contextual richness that other research methods might not offer. They are beneficial when there's a need to understand complex social phenomena within their natural contexts.

The explanatory, exploratory, and descriptive roles of case studies

Case studies can take on various roles depending on the research objectives. They can be exploratory when the research aims to discover new phenomena or define new research questions; they are descriptive when the objective is to depict a phenomenon within its context in a detailed manner; and they can be explanatory if the goal is to understand specific relationships within the studied context. Thus, the versatility of case studies allows researchers to approach their topic from different angles, offering multiple ways to uncover and interpret the data .

The impact of case studies on knowledge development

Case studies play a significant role in knowledge development across various disciplines. Analysis of cases provides an avenue for researchers to explore phenomena within their context based on the collected data.

This can result in the production of rich, practical insights that can be instrumental in both theory-building and practice. Case studies allow researchers to delve into the intricacies and complexities of real-life situations, uncovering insights that might otherwise remain hidden.

Types of case studies

In qualitative research , a case study is not a one-size-fits-all approach. Depending on the nature of the research question and the specific objectives of the study, researchers might choose to use different types of case studies. These types differ in their focus, methodology, and the level of detail they provide about the phenomenon under investigation.

Understanding these types is crucial for selecting the most appropriate approach for your research project and effectively achieving your research goals. Let's briefly look at the main types of case studies.

Exploratory case studies

Exploratory case studies are typically conducted to develop a theory or framework around an understudied phenomenon. They can also serve as a precursor to a larger-scale research project. Exploratory case studies are useful when a researcher wants to identify the key issues or questions which can spur more extensive study or be used to develop propositions for further research. These case studies are characterized by flexibility, allowing researchers to explore various aspects of a phenomenon as they emerge, which can also form the foundation for subsequent studies.

Descriptive case studies

Descriptive case studies aim to provide a complete and accurate representation of a phenomenon or event within its context. These case studies are often based on an established theoretical framework, which guides how data is collected and analyzed. The researcher is concerned with describing the phenomenon in detail, as it occurs naturally, without trying to influence or manipulate it.

Explanatory case studies

Explanatory case studies are focused on explanation - they seek to clarify how or why certain phenomena occur. Often used in complex, real-life situations, they can be particularly valuable in clarifying causal relationships among concepts and understanding the interplay between different factors within a specific context.

Intrinsic, instrumental, and collective case studies

These three categories of case studies focus on the nature and purpose of the study. An intrinsic case study is conducted when a researcher has an inherent interest in the case itself. Instrumental case studies are employed when the case is used to provide insight into a particular issue or phenomenon. A collective case study, on the other hand, involves studying multiple cases simultaneously to investigate some general phenomena.

Each type of case study serves a different purpose and has its own strengths and challenges. The selection of the type should be guided by the research question and objectives, as well as the context and constraints of the research.

The flexibility, depth, and contextual richness offered by case studies make this approach an excellent research method for various fields of study. They enable researchers to investigate real-world phenomena within their specific contexts, capturing nuances that other research methods might miss. Across numerous fields, case studies provide valuable insights into complex issues.

Critical information systems research

Case studies provide a detailed understanding of the role and impact of information systems in different contexts. They offer a platform to explore how information systems are designed, implemented, and used and how they interact with various social, economic, and political factors. Case studies in this field often focus on examining the intricate relationship between technology, organizational processes, and user behavior, helping to uncover insights that can inform better system design and implementation.

Health research

Health research is another field where case studies are highly valuable. They offer a way to explore patient experiences, healthcare delivery processes, and the impact of various interventions in a real-world context.

Case studies can provide a deep understanding of a patient's journey, giving insights into the intricacies of disease progression, treatment effects, and the psychosocial aspects of health and illness.

Asthma research studies

Specifically within medical research, studies on asthma often employ case studies to explore the individual and environmental factors that influence asthma development, management, and outcomes. A case study can provide rich, detailed data about individual patients' experiences, from the triggers and symptoms they experience to the effectiveness of various management strategies. This can be crucial for developing patient-centered asthma care approaches.

Other fields

Apart from the fields mentioned, case studies are also extensively used in business and management research, education research, and political sciences, among many others. They provide an opportunity to delve into the intricacies of real-world situations, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of various phenomena.

Case studies, with their depth and contextual focus, offer unique insights across these varied fields. They allow researchers to illuminate the complexities of real-life situations, contributing to both theory and practice.

Whatever field you're in, ATLAS.ti puts your data to work for you

Download a free trial of ATLAS.ti to turn your data into insights.

Understanding the key elements of case study design is crucial for conducting rigorous and impactful case study research. A well-structured design guides the researcher through the process, ensuring that the study is methodologically sound and its findings are reliable and valid. The main elements of case study design include the research question , propositions, units of analysis, and the logic linking the data to the propositions.

The research question is the foundation of any research study. A good research question guides the direction of the study and informs the selection of the case, the methods of collecting data, and the analysis techniques. A well-formulated research question in case study research is typically clear, focused, and complex enough to merit further detailed examination of the relevant case(s).

Propositions

Propositions, though not necessary in every case study, provide a direction by stating what we might expect to find in the data collected. They guide how data is collected and analyzed by helping researchers focus on specific aspects of the case. They are particularly important in explanatory case studies, which seek to understand the relationships among concepts within the studied phenomenon.

Units of analysis

The unit of analysis refers to the case, or the main entity or entities that are being analyzed in the study. In case study research, the unit of analysis can be an individual, a group, an organization, a decision, an event, or even a time period. It's crucial to clearly define the unit of analysis, as it shapes the qualitative data analysis process by allowing the researcher to analyze a particular case and synthesize analysis across multiple case studies to draw conclusions.

Argumentation

This refers to the inferential model that allows researchers to draw conclusions from the data. The researcher needs to ensure that there is a clear link between the data, the propositions (if any), and the conclusions drawn. This argumentation is what enables the researcher to make valid and credible inferences about the phenomenon under study.

Understanding and carefully considering these elements in the design phase of a case study can significantly enhance the quality of the research. It can help ensure that the study is methodologically sound and its findings contribute meaningful insights about the case.

Ready to jumpstart your research with ATLAS.ti?

Conceptualize your research project with our intuitive data analysis interface. Download a free trial today.

Conducting a case study involves several steps, from defining the research question and selecting the case to collecting and analyzing data . This section outlines these key stages, providing a practical guide on how to conduct case study research.

Defining the research question

The first step in case study research is defining a clear, focused research question. This question should guide the entire research process, from case selection to analysis. It's crucial to ensure that the research question is suitable for a case study approach. Typically, such questions are exploratory or descriptive in nature and focus on understanding a phenomenon within its real-life context.

Selecting and defining the case

The selection of the case should be based on the research question and the objectives of the study. It involves choosing a unique example or a set of examples that provide rich, in-depth data about the phenomenon under investigation. After selecting the case, it's crucial to define it clearly, setting the boundaries of the case, including the time period and the specific context.

Previous research can help guide the case study design. When considering a case study, an example of a case could be taken from previous case study research and used to define cases in a new research inquiry. Considering recently published examples can help understand how to select and define cases effectively.

Developing a detailed case study protocol

A case study protocol outlines the procedures and general rules to be followed during the case study. This includes the data collection methods to be used, the sources of data, and the procedures for analysis. Having a detailed case study protocol ensures consistency and reliability in the study.

The protocol should also consider how to work with the people involved in the research context to grant the research team access to collecting data. As mentioned in previous sections of this guide, establishing rapport is an essential component of qualitative research as it shapes the overall potential for collecting and analyzing data.

Collecting data

Gathering data in case study research often involves multiple sources of evidence, including documents, archival records, interviews, observations, and physical artifacts. This allows for a comprehensive understanding of the case. The process for gathering data should be systematic and carefully documented to ensure the reliability and validity of the study.

Analyzing and interpreting data

The next step is analyzing the data. This involves organizing the data , categorizing it into themes or patterns , and interpreting these patterns to answer the research question. The analysis might also involve comparing the findings with prior research or theoretical propositions.

Writing the case study report

The final step is writing the case study report . This should provide a detailed description of the case, the data, the analysis process, and the findings. The report should be clear, organized, and carefully written to ensure that the reader can understand the case and the conclusions drawn from it.

Each of these steps is crucial in ensuring that the case study research is rigorous, reliable, and provides valuable insights about the case.

The type, depth, and quality of data in your study can significantly influence the validity and utility of the study. In case study research, data is usually collected from multiple sources to provide a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the case. This section will outline the various methods of collecting data used in case study research and discuss considerations for ensuring the quality of the data.

Interviews are a common method of gathering data in case study research. They can provide rich, in-depth data about the perspectives, experiences, and interpretations of the individuals involved in the case. Interviews can be structured , semi-structured , or unstructured , depending on the research question and the degree of flexibility needed.

Observations

Observations involve the researcher observing the case in its natural setting, providing first-hand information about the case and its context. Observations can provide data that might not be revealed in interviews or documents, such as non-verbal cues or contextual information.

Documents and artifacts

Documents and archival records provide a valuable source of data in case study research. They can include reports, letters, memos, meeting minutes, email correspondence, and various public and private documents related to the case.

These records can provide historical context, corroborate evidence from other sources, and offer insights into the case that might not be apparent from interviews or observations.

Physical artifacts refer to any physical evidence related to the case, such as tools, products, or physical environments. These artifacts can provide tangible insights into the case, complementing the data gathered from other sources.

Ensuring the quality of data collection

Determining the quality of data in case study research requires careful planning and execution. It's crucial to ensure that the data is reliable, accurate, and relevant to the research question. This involves selecting appropriate methods of collecting data, properly training interviewers or observers, and systematically recording and storing the data. It also includes considering ethical issues related to collecting and handling data, such as obtaining informed consent and ensuring the privacy and confidentiality of the participants.

Data analysis

Analyzing case study research involves making sense of the rich, detailed data to answer the research question. This process can be challenging due to the volume and complexity of case study data. However, a systematic and rigorous approach to analysis can ensure that the findings are credible and meaningful. This section outlines the main steps and considerations in analyzing data in case study research.

Organizing the data

The first step in the analysis is organizing the data. This involves sorting the data into manageable sections, often according to the data source or the theme. This step can also involve transcribing interviews, digitizing physical artifacts, or organizing observational data.

Categorizing and coding the data

Once the data is organized, the next step is to categorize or code the data. This involves identifying common themes, patterns, or concepts in the data and assigning codes to relevant data segments. Coding can be done manually or with the help of software tools, and in either case, qualitative analysis software can greatly facilitate the entire coding process. Coding helps to reduce the data to a set of themes or categories that can be more easily analyzed.

Identifying patterns and themes

After coding the data, the researcher looks for patterns or themes in the coded data. This involves comparing and contrasting the codes and looking for relationships or patterns among them. The identified patterns and themes should help answer the research question.

Interpreting the data

Once patterns and themes have been identified, the next step is to interpret these findings. This involves explaining what the patterns or themes mean in the context of the research question and the case. This interpretation should be grounded in the data, but it can also involve drawing on theoretical concepts or prior research.

Verification of the data

The last step in the analysis is verification. This involves checking the accuracy and consistency of the analysis process and confirming that the findings are supported by the data. This can involve re-checking the original data, checking the consistency of codes, or seeking feedback from research participants or peers.

Like any research method , case study research has its strengths and limitations. Researchers must be aware of these, as they can influence the design, conduct, and interpretation of the study.

Understanding the strengths and limitations of case study research can also guide researchers in deciding whether this approach is suitable for their research question . This section outlines some of the key strengths and limitations of case study research.

Benefits include the following:

• Rich, detailed data: One of the main strengths of case study research is that it can generate rich, detailed data about the case. This can provide a deep understanding of the case and its context, which can be valuable in exploring complex phenomena.
• Flexibility: Case study research is flexible in terms of design , data collection , and analysis . A sufficient degree of flexibility allows the researcher to adapt the study according to the case and the emerging findings.
• Real-world context: Case study research involves studying the case in its real-world context, which can provide valuable insights into the interplay between the case and its context.
• Multiple sources of evidence: Case study research often involves collecting data from multiple sources , which can enhance the robustness and validity of the findings.

On the other hand, researchers should consider the following limitations:

• Generalizability: A common criticism of case study research is that its findings might not be generalizable to other cases due to the specificity and uniqueness of each case.
• Time and resource intensive: Case study research can be time and resource intensive due to the depth of the investigation and the amount of collected data.
• Complexity of analysis: The rich, detailed data generated in case study research can make analyzing the data challenging.
• Subjectivity: Given the nature of case study research, there may be a higher degree of subjectivity in interpreting the data , so researchers need to reflect on this and transparently convey to audiences how the research was conducted.

Being aware of these strengths and limitations can help researchers design and conduct case study research effectively and interpret and report the findings appropriately.

Ready to analyze your data with ATLAS.ti?

See how our intuitive software can draw key insights from your data with a free trial today.

• First Online: 27 October 2022

Cite this chapter

• R. M. Channaveer 4 &
• Rajendra Baikady 5  

3086 Accesses

1 Citations

This chapter reviews the strengths and limitations of case study as a research method in social sciences. It provides an account of an evidence base to justify why a case study is best suitable for some research questions and why not for some other research questions. Case study designing around the research context, defining the structure and modality, conducting the study, collecting the data through triangulation mode, analysing the data, and interpreting the data and theory building at the end give a holistic view of it. In addition, the chapter also focuses on the types of case study and when and where to use case study as a research method in social science research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Case Study Research

Ang, C. S., Lee, K. F., & Dipolog-Ubanan, G. F. (2019). Determinants of first-year student identity and satisfaction in higher education: A quantitative case study. SAGE Open, 9 (2), 215824401984668. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019846689

Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2015). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report . Published. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2008.1573

Bhatta, T. P. (2018). Case study research, philosophical position and theory building: A methodological discussion. Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology, 12 , 72–79. https://doi.org/10.3126/dsaj.v12i0.22182

Article   Google Scholar  

Bromley, P. D. (1990). Academic contributions to psychological counselling. A philosophy of science for the study of individual cases. Counselling Psychology Quarterly , 3 (3), 299–307.

Google Scholar  

Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A., Huby, G., Avery, A., & Sheikh, A. (2011). The case study approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11 (1), 1–9.

Grässel, E., & Schirmer, B. (2006). The use of volunteers to support family carers of dementia patients: Results of a prospective longitudinal study investigating expectations towards and experience with training and professional support. Zeitschrift Fur Gerontologie Und Geriatrie, 39 (3), 217–226.

Greenwood, D., & Lowenthal, D. (2005). Case study as a means of researching social work and improving practitioner education. Journal of Social Work Practice, 19 (2), 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650530500144782

Gülseçen, S., & Kubat, A. (2006). Teaching ICT to teacher candidates using PBL: A qualitative and quantitative evaluation. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 9 (2), 96–106.

Gomm, R., Hammersley, M., & Foster, P. (2000). Case study and generalization. Case study method , 98–115.

Hamera, J., Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). Performance ethnography . SAGE.

Hayes, N. (2000). Doing psychological research (p. 133). Open University Press.

Harrison, H., Birks, M., Franklin, R., & Mills, J. (2017). Case study research: Foundations and methodological orientations. In Forum qualitative sozialforschung/forum: Qualitative social research (Vol. 18, No. 1).

Iwakabe, S., & Gazzola, N. (2009). From single-case studies to practice-based knowledge: Aggregating and synthesizing case studies. Psychotherapy Research, 19 (4–5), 601–611. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503300802688494

Johnson, M. P. (2006). Decision models for the location of community corrections centers. Environment and Planning b: Planning and Design, 33 (3), 393–412. https://doi.org/10.1068/b3125

Kaarbo, J., & Beasley, R. K. (1999). A practical guide to the comparative case study method in political psychology. Political Psychology, 20 (2), 369–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895x.00149

Lovell, G. I. (2006). Justice excused: The deployment of law in everyday political encounters. Law Society Review, 40 (2), 283–324. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5893.2006.00265.x

McDonough, S., & McDonough, S. (1997). Research methods as part of English language teacher education. English Language Teacher Education and Development, 3 (1), 84–96.

Meredith, J. (1998). Building operations management theory through case and field research. Journal of Operations Management, 16 (4), 441–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0272-6963(98)00023-0

Mills, A. J., Durepos, G., & Wiebe, E. (Eds.). (2009). Encyclopedia of case study research . Sage Publications.

Ochieng, P. A. (2009). An analysis of the strengths and limitation of qualitative and quantitative research paradigms. Problems of Education in the 21st Century , 13 , 13.

Page, E. B., Webb, E. J., Campell, D. T., Schwart, R. D., & Sechrest, L. (1966). Unobtrusive measures: Nonreactive research in the social sciences. American Educational Research Journal, 3 (4), 317. https://doi.org/10.2307/1162043

Rashid, Y., Rashid, A., Warraich, M. A., Sabir, S. S., & Waseem, A. (2019). Case study method: A step-by-step guide for business researchers. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18 , 160940691986242. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919862424

Ridder, H. G. (2017). The theory contribution of case study research designs. Business Research, 10 (2), 281–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-017-0045-z

Sadeghi Moghadam, M. R., Ghasemnia Arabi, N., & Khoshsima, G. (2021). A Review of case study method in operations management research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20 , 160940692110100. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211010088

Sommer, B. B., & Sommer, R. (1997). A practical guide to behavioral research: Tools and techniques . Oxford University Press.

Stake, R. E. (2010). Qualitative research: Studying how things work .

Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research . Sage Publications.

Stoecker, R. (1991). Evaluating and rethinking the case study. The Sociological Review, 39 (1), 88–112.

Suryani, A. (2013). Comparing case study and ethnography as qualitative research approaches .

Taylor, S., & Berridge, V. (2006). Medicinal plants and malaria: An historical case study of research at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine in the twentieth century. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 100 (8), 707–714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trstmh.2005.11.017

Tellis, W. (1997). Introduction to case study. The Qualitative Report . Published. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/1997.2024

Towne, L., & Shavelson, R. J. (2002). Scientific research in education . National Academy Press Publications Sales Office.

Widdowson, M. D. J. (2011). Case study research methodology. International Journal of Transactional Analysis Research, 2 (1), 25–34.

Yin, R. K. (2004). The case study anthology . Sage.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Design and methods. Case Study Research , 3 (9.2).

Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Sage Publishing.

Yin, R. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods . Sage Publications Beverly Hills.

Yin, R. (1993). Applications of case study research . Sage Publishing.

Zainal, Z. (2003). An investigation into the effects of discipline-specific knowledge, proficiency and genre on reading comprehension and strategies of Malaysia ESP Students. Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis. University of Reading , 1 (1).

Zeisel, J. (1984). Inquiry by design: Tools for environment-behaviour research (No. 5). CUP archive.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Social Work, Central University of Karnataka, Kadaganchi, India

R. M. Channaveer

Department of Social Work, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

Rajendra Baikady

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. M. Channaveer .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Centre for Family and Child Studies, Research Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

M. Rezaul Islam

Department of Development Studies, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh

Niaz Ahmed Khan

Department of Social Work, School of Humanities, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Channaveer, R.M., Baikady, R. (2022). Case Study. In: Islam, M.R., Khan, N.A., Baikady, R. (eds) Principles of Social Research Methodology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5441-2_21

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5441-2_21

Published : 27 October 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-19-5219-7

Online ISBN : 978-981-19-5441-2

eBook Packages : Social Sciences Social Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Sweepstakes
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

What Is a Case Study?

Weighing the pros and cons of this method of research

Verywell / Colleen Tighe

• Pros and Cons

What Types of Case Studies Are Out There?

Where do you find data for a case study, how do i write a psychology case study.

A case study is an in-depth study of one person, group, or event. In a case study, nearly every aspect of the subject's life and history is analyzed to seek patterns and causes of behavior. Case studies can be used in many different fields, including psychology, medicine, education, anthropology, political science, and social work.

The point of a case study is to learn as much as possible about an individual or group so that the information can be generalized to many others. Unfortunately, case studies tend to be highly subjective, and it is sometimes difficult to generalize results to a larger population.

While case studies focus on a single individual or group, they follow a format similar to other types of psychology writing. If you are writing a case study, we got you—here are some rules of APA format to reference.  

At a Glance

A case study, or an in-depth study of a person, group, or event, can be a useful research tool when used wisely. In many cases, case studies are best used in situations where it would be difficult or impossible for you to conduct an experiment. They are helpful for looking at unique situations and allow researchers to gather a lot of˜ information about a specific individual or group of people. However, it's important to be cautious of any bias we draw from them as they are highly subjective.

What Are the Benefits and Limitations of Case Studies?

A case study can have its strengths and weaknesses. Researchers must consider these pros and cons before deciding if this type of study is appropriate for their needs.

One of the greatest advantages of a case study is that it allows researchers to investigate things that are often difficult or impossible to replicate in a lab. Some other benefits of a case study:

• Allows researchers to capture information on the 'how,' 'what,' and 'why,' of something that's implemented
• Gives researchers the chance to collect information on why one strategy might be chosen over another
• Permits researchers to develop hypotheses that can be explored in experimental research

On the other hand, a case study can have some drawbacks:

• It cannot necessarily be generalized to the larger population
• Cannot demonstrate cause and effect
• It may not be scientifically rigorous
• It can lead to bias

Researchers may choose to perform a case study if they want to explore a unique or recently discovered phenomenon. Through their insights, researchers develop additional ideas and study questions that might be explored in future studies.

It's important to remember that the insights from case studies cannot be used to determine cause-and-effect relationships between variables. However, case studies may be used to develop hypotheses that can then be addressed in experimental research.

Case Study Examples

There have been a number of notable case studies in the history of psychology. Much of  Freud's work and theories were developed through individual case studies. Some great examples of case studies in psychology include:

• Anna O : Anna O. was a pseudonym of a woman named Bertha Pappenheim, a patient of a physician named Josef Breuer. While she was never a patient of Freud's, Freud and Breuer discussed her case extensively. The woman was experiencing symptoms of a condition that was then known as hysteria and found that talking about her problems helped relieve her symptoms. Her case played an important part in the development of talk therapy as an approach to mental health treatment.
• Phineas Gage : Phineas Gage was a railroad employee who experienced a terrible accident in which an explosion sent a metal rod through his skull, damaging important portions of his brain. Gage recovered from his accident but was left with serious changes in both personality and behavior.
• Genie : Genie was a young girl subjected to horrific abuse and isolation. The case study of Genie allowed researchers to study whether language learning was possible, even after missing critical periods for language development. Her case also served as an example of how scientific research may interfere with treatment and lead to further abuse of vulnerable individuals.

Such cases demonstrate how case research can be used to study things that researchers could not replicate in experimental settings. In Genie's case, her horrific abuse denied her the opportunity to learn a language at critical points in her development.

This is clearly not something researchers could ethically replicate, but conducting a case study on Genie allowed researchers to study phenomena that are otherwise impossible to reproduce.

There are a few different types of case studies that psychologists and other researchers might use:

• Collective case studies : These involve studying a group of individuals. Researchers might study a group of people in a certain setting or look at an entire community. For example, psychologists might explore how access to resources in a community has affected the collective mental well-being of those who live there.
• Descriptive case studies : These involve starting with a descriptive theory. The subjects are then observed, and the information gathered is compared to the pre-existing theory.
• Explanatory case studies : These   are often used to do causal investigations. In other words, researchers are interested in looking at factors that may have caused certain things to occur.
• Exploratory case studies : These are sometimes used as a prelude to further, more in-depth research. This allows researchers to gather more information before developing their research questions and hypotheses .
• Instrumental case studies : These occur when the individual or group allows researchers to understand more than what is initially obvious to observers.
• Intrinsic case studies : This type of case study is when the researcher has a personal interest in the case. Jean Piaget's observations of his own children are good examples of how an intrinsic case study can contribute to the development of a psychological theory.

The three main case study types often used are intrinsic, instrumental, and collective. Intrinsic case studies are useful for learning about unique cases. Instrumental case studies help look at an individual to learn more about a broader issue. A collective case study can be useful for looking at several cases simultaneously.

The type of case study that psychology researchers use depends on the unique characteristics of the situation and the case itself.

There are a number of different sources and methods that researchers can use to gather information about an individual or group. Six major sources that have been identified by researchers are:

• Archival records : Census records, survey records, and name lists are examples of archival records.
• Direct observation : This strategy involves observing the subject, often in a natural setting . While an individual observer is sometimes used, it is more common to utilize a group of observers.
• Documents : Letters, newspaper articles, administrative records, etc., are the types of documents often used as sources.
• Interviews : Interviews are one of the most important methods for gathering information in case studies. An interview can involve structured survey questions or more open-ended questions.
• Participant observation : When the researcher serves as a participant in events and observes the actions and outcomes, it is called participant observation.
• Physical artifacts : Tools, objects, instruments, and other artifacts are often observed during a direct observation of the subject.

If you have been directed to write a case study for a psychology course, be sure to check with your instructor for any specific guidelines you need to follow. If you are writing your case study for a professional publication, check with the publisher for their specific guidelines for submitting a case study.

Here is a general outline of what should be included in a case study.

Section 1: A Case History

This section will have the following structure and content:

Background information : The first section of your paper will present your client's background. Include factors such as age, gender, work, health status, family mental health history, family and social relationships, drug and alcohol history, life difficulties, goals, and coping skills and weaknesses.

Description of the presenting problem : In the next section of your case study, you will describe the problem or symptoms that the client presented with.

Describe any physical, emotional, or sensory symptoms reported by the client. Thoughts, feelings, and perceptions related to the symptoms should also be noted. Any screening or diagnostic assessments that are used should also be described in detail and all scores reported.

Your diagnosis : Provide your diagnosis and give the appropriate Diagnostic and Statistical Manual code. Explain how you reached your diagnosis, how the client's symptoms fit the diagnostic criteria for the disorder(s), or any possible difficulties in reaching a diagnosis.

Section 2: Treatment Plan

This portion of the paper will address the chosen treatment for the condition. This might also include the theoretical basis for the chosen treatment or any other evidence that might exist to support why this approach was chosen.

• Cognitive behavioral approach : Explain how a cognitive behavioral therapist would approach treatment. Offer background information on cognitive behavioral therapy and describe the treatment sessions, client response, and outcome of this type of treatment. Make note of any difficulties or successes encountered by your client during treatment.
• Humanistic approach : Describe a humanistic approach that could be used to treat your client, such as client-centered therapy . Provide information on the type of treatment you chose, the client's reaction to the treatment, and the end result of this approach. Explain why the treatment was successful or unsuccessful.
• Psychoanalytic approach : Describe how a psychoanalytic therapist would view the client's problem. Provide some background on the psychoanalytic approach and cite relevant references. Explain how psychoanalytic therapy would be used to treat the client, how the client would respond to therapy, and the effectiveness of this treatment approach.
• Pharmacological approach : If treatment primarily involves the use of medications, explain which medications were used and why. Provide background on the effectiveness of these medications and how monotherapy may compare with an approach that combines medications with therapy or other treatments.

This section of a case study should also include information about the treatment goals, process, and outcomes.

When you are writing a case study, you should also include a section where you discuss the case study itself, including the strengths and limitiations of the study. You should note how the findings of your case study might support previous research. 

In your discussion section, you should also describe some of the implications of your case study. What ideas or findings might require further exploration? How might researchers go about exploring some of these questions in additional studies?

Need More Tips?

Here are a few additional pointers to keep in mind when formatting your case study:

• Never refer to the subject of your case study as "the client." Instead, use their name or a pseudonym.
• Read examples of case studies to gain an idea about the style and format.
• Remember to use APA format when citing references .

Crowe S, Cresswell K, Robertson A, Huby G, Avery A, Sheikh A. The case study approach .  BMC Med Res Methodol . 2011;11:100.

Crowe S, Cresswell K, Robertson A, Huby G, Avery A, Sheikh A. The case study approach . BMC Med Res Methodol . 2011 Jun 27;11:100. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Gagnon, Yves-Chantal.  The Case Study as Research Method: A Practical Handbook . Canada, Chicago Review Press Incorporated DBA Independent Pub Group, 2010.

Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods . United States, SAGE Publications, 2017.

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

What the Case Study Method Really Teaches

• Nitin Nohria

Seven meta-skills that stick even if the cases fade from memory.

It’s been 100 years since Harvard Business School began using the case study method. Beyond teaching specific subject matter, the case study method excels in instilling meta-skills in students. This article explains the importance of seven such skills: preparation, discernment, bias recognition, judgement, collaboration, curiosity, and self-confidence.

During my decade as dean of Harvard Business School, I spent hundreds of hours talking with our alumni. To enliven these conversations, I relied on a favorite question: “What was the most important thing you learned from your time in our MBA program?”

• Nitin Nohria is the George F. Baker Jr. and Distinguished Service University Professor. He served as the 10th dean of Harvard Business School, from 2010 to 2020.

Partner Center

Case Study: Types, Advantages And Disadvantages

  Case Study: Types, Advantages And Disadvantages 

Case study is both method and tool for research. Case study is the intensive study of a phenomenon, but it gives subjective information rather than objective. It gives detailed knowledge about the phenomena and is not able to generalize beyond the knowledge.

Case studies aim to analyze specific issues within the boundaries of a specific environment, situation or organization. According to its design, case study research method can be divided into three categories: explanatory, descriptive and exploratory.

Explanatory case studies aim to answer ‘how’ or ‘why’ questions with little control on behalf of the researcher over occurrence of events. This type of case study focuses on phenomena within the contexts of real-life situations.

Descriptive case studies aim to analyze the sequence of interpersonal events after a certain amount of time has passed. Case studies belonging to this category usually describe culture or sub-culture, and they attempt to discover the key phenomena.

Exploratory case studies aim to find answers to the questions of ‘what’ or ‘who’. Exploratory case study data collection method is often accompanied by additional data collection method(s) such as interviews, questionnaires, experiments etc.

DEFINITION OF CASE STUDY

The case study or case history method is not a newer thing, but it is a linear descendent of very ancient methods of sociological description and generalization namely, the ‘parable’, the ‘allegory’, the ‘story’ and the ‘novel’.

According to P.V. Young . “A fairly exhaustive study of a person or group is called a life of case history.”

Thus, the case study is more intensive in nature; the field of study is comparatively limited but has more depth in it.

TYPES OF CASE STUDY

Six types of case studies are conducted which are as follows:

Community Studies: The community study is a careful description and analysis of a group of people living together in a particular geographic location in a corporative way. The community study deals with such elements of the community as location, appearance, prevailing economic activity, climate and natural sources, historical development, how the people live, the social structure, goals and life values, an evaluation of the social institutions within the community that meet the human needs etc. Such studies are case studies, with the community serving as the case under investigation.

Casual Comparative Studies: Another type of study seeks to find the answers to the problems through the analysis of casual relationships. What factors seem to be associated with certain occurrences, conditions or types of behaviour? By the methodology of descriptive research, the relative importance of these factors may be investigated.

Activity Analysis: The analysis of the activities or processes that an individual is called upon to perform is important, both in industry and in various types of social agencies. This process of analysis is appropriate in any field of work and at all levels of responsibility. In social system, the roles of superintendent, the principal, the teacher and the custodian have been carefully analyzed to discover what these individuals do and need to be able to do.

Content or Document Analysis: Content analysis, sometimes known as document analysis. Deals with the systematic examination of current records or documents as sources of data. In documentary analysis, the following may be used as sources of data: official records and reports, printed forms, text-books, reference books, letters, autobiographies diaries, pictures, films and cartoons etc . But in using documentary sources, one must bear in mind the fact that data appearing in print is not necessarily trustworthy. This content or document analysis should serve a useful purpose in research, adding important knowledge to a field to study or yielding information that is helpful in evaluating and improving social or educational practices.

A Follow-up Study: A follow-up study investigates individuals who have left an institution after having completed programme, a treatment or a course of study, to know what has been the impact of the institutions and its programme upon them. By examining their status or seeking their opinions, one may get some idea of the adequacy or inadequacy of the institutes programme. Studies of this type enable an institution to evaluate various aspects of its programme in the light of actual results.

Trend Studies: The trend or predictive study is an interesting application of the descriptive method. In essence, it is based upon a longitudinal consideration of recorded data, indicating what has been happening in the past, what does the present situation reveal and on the basis of these data, what will be likely to happen in the future.

Whatever type of case study is to conduct, it’s important to first identify the purpose, goals, and approach for conducting methodologically sound research.

ADVANTAGES OF CASE STUDY

The main points of advantages of case study are given below:

Formation of valid hypothesis: Case study helps in formulating valid hypothesis. Once the various cases are extensively studied and analyze, the researcher can deduce various generalizations, which may be developed into useful hypotheses. It is admitted by all that the study of relevant literature and case study form the only potent sources of hypothesis.

  Useful in framing questionnaires and schedules: Case study is of great help in framing questionnaires, schedules or other forms. When a questionnaire is prepared after thorough case study the peculiarities of the group as well as individual units, become known also the type of response likely to be available, liking and aversions of the people. This helps in getting prompt response.

Sampling: Case study is of help in the stratification of the sample. By studying the individual units the researcher can put them in definite classes or types and thereby facilitate the perfect stratification of the sample.

Location of deviant cases: The case study makes it possible to locate deviant cases. There exists a general tendency to ignore them, but for scientific analysis, they are very important. The analysis of such cases is of valuable help in clarifying the theory itself.

Study of process: In cases where the problem under study constitutes a process and not one incident e.g. courtship process, clique formation etc., case study is the appropriate method as the case data is essential for valid study of such problems.

Enlarges experience: The range of personal experience of the researcher is enlarged by the case study on the other hand in statistical methods a narrow range of topics is selected, and the researcher’s knowledge is restricted to the particular aspect only.

Qualitative analysis in actual situation: Case study enables the establishment of the significance of the recorded data when the individual is alive and later on within the life of the classes of individuals. The researcher has the opportunity to come into contact with different classes of people and he is in a position to watch their life and hear their experiences. This provides him with an opportunity to acquire experiences of such life situations which he is never expected to lead.

This discussion highlights the advantages of the case data in social research. Social scientists developed the techniques to make it more perfect and remove the chances of bias.

LIMITATIONS/DISADVANTAGES OF CASE STUDY METHOD

Subjective bias: Research subjectivity in collecting data for supporting or refuting a particular explanation, personal view of investigation influences the findings and conclusion of the study.

Problem of objectivity: Due to excessive association with the social unit under investigation the researcher may develop self-justificatory data which are far from being factual.

Difficulty in comparison: Because of wide variations among human beings in terms of their response and behaviour, attitudes and values, social setting and circumstances, etc., the researcher actually finds it difficult to trace out two social units which are identical in all respects. This hinders proper comparison of cases.

A time, energy and money consuming method: The preparation of a case history involves a lot of time and expenditure of human energy, therefore, there is every possibility that most of the cases may get stray. Due to such difficulties, only a few researchers can afford to case study method.

Time span: Long time span may be another factor that is likely to distort the information provided by the social unit to the researcher.

Unreliable source material: The two major sources of case study are: Personal documents and life history. But in both these cases, the records or the own experience of the social units may not present a true picture. On the contrary, the social unit may try to suppress his unpleasant facts or add colour to them. As a result, the conclusions drawn do not give a true picture and dependable findings.

Scope for wrong conclusions: The case study is laden with inaccurate observation, wrong inferences, faulty reporting, memory failure, repression or omission of unpleasant facts in an unconscious manner, dramatization of facts, more imaginary description, and difficulty in choosing a case typical of the group. All these problems provide the researcher with every possibility of drawing wrong conclusions and errors.

Case studies are complex because they generally involve multiple sources of data, may include multiple cases within a study and produce large amounts of data for analysis. Researchers from many disciplines use the case study method to build upon theory, to produce new theory, to dispute or challenge theory, to explain a situation, to provide a basis to apply solutions to situations, to explore, or to describe an object or phenomenon. The advantages of the case study method are its applicability to real-life, contemporary, human situations and its public accessibility through written reports. Case study results relate directly to the common readers everyday experience and facilitate an understanding of complex real-life situations.

__________________________________________________________________________

Research Methodology Methods and Techniques~C. R. Kothari (p.113) - Link

Fundamental of Research Methodology and Statistics~Yogesh Kumar Singh (Chapter–10: Case Study Method p. 147) - Link

Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches~W. Lawrence Neuman (p.42) - Link

The Basics of Social Research~Earl Babbie (p.280) - Link

Social Science Research Principles, Methods, and Practices~Anol Bhattacherjee (93) - Link

PREPARING A CASE STUDY: A Guide for Designing and Conducting a Case Study for Evaluation Input - Link

A Case in Case Study Methodology - Link

Case Study Method - Link1 & Link 2

Unit-4 Case Study - Link

Case study as a research method - Link

Case_Study~Tanya Sammut-Bonnici and John McGee - Link

Post a Comment

Contact form.

Case Study vs. Survey

What's the difference.

Case studies and surveys are both research methods used in various fields to gather information and insights. However, they differ in their approach and purpose. A case study involves an in-depth analysis of a specific individual, group, or situation, aiming to understand the complexities and unique aspects of the subject. It often involves collecting qualitative data through interviews, observations, and document analysis. On the other hand, a survey is a structured data collection method that involves gathering information from a larger sample size through standardized questionnaires. Surveys are typically used to collect quantitative data and provide a broader perspective on a particular topic or population. While case studies provide rich and detailed information, surveys offer a more generalizable and statistical overview.

Further Detail

Introduction.

When conducting research, there are various methods available to gather data and analyze it. Two commonly used methods are case study and survey. Both approaches have their own unique attributes and can be valuable in different research contexts. In this article, we will explore the characteristics of case study and survey, highlighting their strengths and limitations.

A case study is an in-depth investigation of a particular individual, group, or phenomenon. It involves collecting detailed information about the subject of study through various sources such as interviews, observations, and document analysis. Case studies are often used in social sciences, psychology, and business research to gain a deep understanding of complex issues.

One of the key attributes of a case study is its ability to provide rich and detailed data. Researchers can gather extensive information about the subject, including their background, experiences, and perspectives. This depth of data allows for a comprehensive analysis and interpretation of the case, providing valuable insights into the phenomenon under investigation.

Furthermore, case studies are particularly useful when studying rare or unique cases. Since case studies focus on specific individuals or groups, they can shed light on situations that are not easily replicated or observed in larger populations. This makes case studies valuable in exploring complex and nuanced phenomena that may not be easily captured through other research methods.

However, it is important to note that case studies have certain limitations. Due to their in-depth nature, case studies are often time-consuming and resource-intensive. Researchers need to invest significant effort in data collection, analysis, and interpretation. Additionally, the findings of a case study may not be easily generalized to larger populations, as the focus is on a specific case rather than a representative sample.

Despite these limitations, case studies offer a unique opportunity to explore complex issues in real-life contexts. They provide a detailed understanding of individual experiences and can generate hypotheses for further research.

A survey is a research method that involves collecting data from a sample of individuals through a structured questionnaire or interview. Surveys are widely used in social sciences, market research, and public opinion studies to gather information about a larger population. They aim to provide a snapshot of people's opinions, attitudes, behaviors, or characteristics.

One of the main advantages of surveys is their ability to collect data from a large number of respondents. By reaching out to a representative sample, researchers can generalize the findings to a larger population. Surveys also allow for efficient data collection, as questionnaires can be distributed electronically or in person, making it easier to gather a wide range of responses in a relatively short period.

Moreover, surveys offer a structured approach to data collection, ensuring consistency in the questions asked and the response options provided. This allows for easy comparison and analysis of the data, making surveys suitable for quantitative research. Surveys can also be conducted anonymously, which can encourage respondents to provide honest and unbiased answers, particularly when sensitive topics are being explored.

However, surveys also have their limitations. One of the challenges is the potential for response bias. Respondents may provide inaccurate or socially desirable answers, leading to biased results. Additionally, surveys often rely on self-reported data, which may be subject to memory recall errors or misinterpretation of questions. Researchers need to carefully design the survey instrument and consider potential biases to ensure the validity and reliability of the data collected.

Furthermore, surveys may not capture the complexity and depth of individual experiences. They provide a snapshot of people's opinions or behaviors at a specific point in time, but may not uncover the underlying reasons or motivations behind those responses. Surveys also rely on predetermined response options, limiting the range of possible answers and potentially overlooking important nuances.

Case studies and surveys are both valuable research methods, each with its own strengths and limitations. Case studies offer in-depth insights into specific cases, providing rich and detailed data. They are particularly useful for exploring complex and unique phenomena. On the other hand, surveys allow for efficient data collection from a large number of respondents, enabling generalization to larger populations. They provide structured and quantifiable data, making them suitable for statistical analysis.

Ultimately, the choice between case study and survey depends on the research objectives, the nature of the research question, and the available resources. Researchers need to carefully consider the attributes of each method and select the most appropriate approach to gather and analyze data effectively.

Comparisons may contain inaccurate information about people, places, or facts. Please report any issues.

Case Study Research Method in Psychology

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

Case studies are in-depth investigations of a person, group, event, or community. Typically, data is gathered from various sources using several methods (e.g., observations & interviews).

The case study research method originated in clinical medicine (the case history, i.e., the patient’s personal history). In psychology, case studies are often confined to the study of a particular individual.

The information is mainly biographical and relates to events in the individual’s past (i.e., retrospective), as well as to significant events that are currently occurring in his or her everyday life.

The case study is not a research method, but researchers select methods of data collection and analysis that will generate material suitable for case studies.

Freud (1909a, 1909b) conducted very detailed investigations into the private lives of his patients in an attempt to both understand and help them overcome their illnesses.

This makes it clear that the case study is a method that should only be used by a psychologist, therapist, or psychiatrist, i.e., someone with a professional qualification.

There is an ethical issue of competence. Only someone qualified to diagnose and treat a person can conduct a formal case study relating to atypical (i.e., abnormal) behavior or atypical development.

 Famous Case Studies

• Anna O – One of the most famous case studies, documenting psychoanalyst Josef Breuer’s treatment of “Anna O” (real name Bertha Pappenheim) for hysteria in the late 1800s using early psychoanalytic theory.
• Little Hans – A child psychoanalysis case study published by Sigmund Freud in 1909 analyzing his five-year-old patient Herbert Graf’s house phobia as related to the Oedipus complex.
• Bruce/Brenda – Gender identity case of the boy (Bruce) whose botched circumcision led psychologist John Money to advise gender reassignment and raise him as a girl (Brenda) in the 1960s.
• Genie Wiley – Linguistics/psychological development case of the victim of extreme isolation abuse who was studied in 1970s California for effects of early language deprivation on acquiring speech later in life.
• Phineas Gage – One of the most famous neuropsychology case studies analyzes personality changes in railroad worker Phineas Gage after an 1848 brain injury involving a tamping iron piercing his skull.

Clinical Case Studies

• Studying the effectiveness of psychotherapy approaches with an individual patient
• Assessing and treating mental illnesses like depression, anxiety disorders, PTSD
• Neuropsychological cases investigating brain injuries or disorders

Child Psychology Case Studies

• Studying psychological development from birth through adolescence
• Cases of learning disabilities, autism spectrum disorders, ADHD
• Effects of trauma, abuse, deprivation on development

Types of Case Studies

• Explanatory case studies : Used to explore causation in order to find underlying principles. Helpful for doing qualitative analysis to explain presumed causal links.
• Exploratory case studies : Used to explore situations where an intervention being evaluated has no clear set of outcomes. It helps define questions and hypotheses for future research.
• Descriptive case studies : Describe an intervention or phenomenon and the real-life context in which it occurred. It is helpful for illustrating certain topics within an evaluation.
• Multiple-case studies : Used to explore differences between cases and replicate findings across cases. Helpful for comparing and contrasting specific cases.
• Intrinsic : Used to gain a better understanding of a particular case. Helpful for capturing the complexity of a single case.
• Collective : Used to explore a general phenomenon using multiple case studies. Helpful for jointly studying a group of cases in order to inquire into the phenomenon.

Where Do You Find Data for a Case Study?

There are several places to find data for a case study. The key is to gather data from multiple sources to get a complete picture of the case and corroborate facts or findings through triangulation of evidence. Most of this information is likely qualitative (i.e., verbal description rather than measurement), but the psychologist might also collect numerical data.

1. Primary sources

• Interviews – Interviewing key people related to the case to get their perspectives and insights. The interview is an extremely effective procedure for obtaining information about an individual, and it may be used to collect comments from the person’s friends, parents, employer, workmates, and others who have a good knowledge of the person, as well as to obtain facts from the person him or herself.
• Observations – Observing behaviors, interactions, processes, etc., related to the case as they unfold in real-time.
• Documents & Records – Reviewing private documents, diaries, public records, correspondence, meeting minutes, etc., relevant to the case.

2. Secondary sources

• News/Media – News coverage of events related to the case study.
• Academic articles – Journal articles, dissertations etc. that discuss the case.
• Government reports – Official data and records related to the case context.
• Books/films – Books, documentaries or films discussing the case.

3. Archival records

Searching historical archives, museum collections and databases to find relevant documents, visual/audio records related to the case history and context.

Public archives like newspapers, organizational records, photographic collections could all include potentially relevant pieces of information to shed light on attitudes, cultural perspectives, common practices and historical contexts related to psychology.

4. Organizational records

Organizational records offer the advantage of often having large datasets collected over time that can reveal or confirm psychological insights.

Of course, privacy and ethical concerns regarding confidential data must be navigated carefully.

However, with proper protocols, organizational records can provide invaluable context and empirical depth to qualitative case studies exploring the intersection of psychology and organizations.

• Organizational/industrial psychology research : Organizational records like employee surveys, turnover/retention data, policies, incident reports etc. may provide insight into topics like job satisfaction, workplace culture and dynamics, leadership issues, employee behaviors etc.
• Clinical psychology : Therapists/hospitals may grant access to anonymized medical records to study aspects like assessments, diagnoses, treatment plans etc. This could shed light on clinical practices.
• School psychology : Studies could utilize anonymized student records like test scores, grades, disciplinary issues, and counseling referrals to study child development, learning barriers, effectiveness of support programs, and more.

How do I Write a Case Study in Psychology?

Follow specified case study guidelines provided by a journal or your psychology tutor. General components of clinical case studies include: background, symptoms, assessments, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes. Interpreting the information means the researcher decides what to include or leave out. A good case study should always clarify which information is the factual description and which is an inference or the researcher’s opinion.

1. Introduction

• Provide background on the case context and why it is of interest, presenting background information like demographics, relevant history, and presenting problem.
• Compare briefly to similar published cases if applicable. Clearly state the focus/importance of the case.

2. Case Presentation

• Describe the presenting problem in detail, including symptoms, duration,and impact on daily life.
• Include client demographics like age and gender, information about social relationships, and mental health history.
• Describe all physical, emotional, and/or sensory symptoms reported by the client.
• Use patient quotes to describe the initial complaint verbatim. Follow with full-sentence summaries of relevant history details gathered, including key components that led to a working diagnosis.
• Summarize clinical exam results, namely orthopedic/neurological tests, imaging, lab tests, etc. Note actual results rather than subjective conclusions. Provide images if clearly reproducible/anonymized.
• Clearly state the working diagnosis or clinical impression before transitioning to management.

3. Management and Outcome

• Indicate the total duration of care and number of treatments given over what timeframe. Use specific names/descriptions for any therapies/interventions applied.
• Present the results of the intervention,including any quantitative or qualitative data collected.
• For outcomes, utilize visual analog scales for pain, medication usage logs, etc., if possible. Include patient self-reports of improvement/worsening of symptoms. Note the reason for discharge/end of care.

4. Discussion

• Analyze the case, exploring contributing factors, limitations of the study, and connections to existing research.
• Analyze the effectiveness of the intervention,considering factors like participant adherence, limitations of the study, and potential alternative explanations for the results.
• Identify any questions raised in the case analysis and relate insights to established theories and current research if applicable. Avoid definitive claims about physiological explanations.
• Offer clinical implications, and suggest future research directions.

5. Additional Items

• Thank specific assistants for writing support only. No patient acknowledgments.
• References should directly support any key claims or quotes included.
• Use tables/figures/images only if substantially informative. Include permissions and legends/explanatory notes.
• Provides detailed (rich qualitative) information.
• Provides insight for further research.
• Permitting investigation of otherwise impractical (or unethical) situations.

Case studies allow a researcher to investigate a topic in far more detail than might be possible if they were trying to deal with a large number of research participants (nomothetic approach) with the aim of ‘averaging’.

Because of their in-depth, multi-sided approach, case studies often shed light on aspects of human thinking and behavior that would be unethical or impractical to study in other ways.

Research that only looks into the measurable aspects of human behavior is not likely to give us insights into the subjective dimension of experience, which is important to psychoanalytic and humanistic psychologists.

Case studies are often used in exploratory research. They can help us generate new ideas (that might be tested by other methods). They are an important way of illustrating theories and can help show how different aspects of a person’s life are related to each other.

The method is, therefore, important for psychologists who adopt a holistic point of view (i.e., humanistic psychologists ).

Limitations

• Lacking scientific rigor and providing little basis for generalization of results to the wider population.
• Researchers’ own subjective feelings may influence the case study (researcher bias).
• Difficult to replicate.
• Time-consuming and expensive.
• The volume of data, together with the time restrictions in place, impacted the depth of analysis that was possible within the available resources.

Because a case study deals with only one person/event/group, we can never be sure if the case study investigated is representative of the wider body of “similar” instances. This means the conclusions drawn from a particular case may not be transferable to other settings.

Because case studies are based on the analysis of qualitative (i.e., descriptive) data , a lot depends on the psychologist’s interpretation of the information she has acquired.

This means that there is a lot of scope for Anna O , and it could be that the subjective opinions of the psychologist intrude in the assessment of what the data means.

For example, Freud has been criticized for producing case studies in which the information was sometimes distorted to fit particular behavioral theories (e.g., Little Hans ).

This is also true of Money’s interpretation of the Bruce/Brenda case study (Diamond, 1997) when he ignored evidence that went against his theory.

Breuer, J., & Freud, S. (1895).  Studies on hysteria . Standard Edition 2: London.

Curtiss, S. (1981). Genie: The case of a modern wild child .

Diamond, M., & Sigmundson, K. (1997). Sex Reassignment at Birth: Long-term Review and Clinical Implications. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine , 151(3), 298-304

Freud, S. (1909a). Analysis of a phobia of a five year old boy. In The Pelican Freud Library (1977), Vol 8, Case Histories 1, pages 169-306

Freud, S. (1909b). Bemerkungen über einen Fall von Zwangsneurose (Der “Rattenmann”). Jb. psychoanal. psychopathol. Forsch ., I, p. 357-421; GW, VII, p. 379-463; Notes upon a case of obsessional neurosis, SE , 10: 151-318.

Harlow J. M. (1848). Passage of an iron rod through the head.  Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, 39 , 389–393.

Harlow, J. M. (1868).  Recovery from the Passage of an Iron Bar through the Head .  Publications of the Massachusetts Medical Society. 2  (3), 327-347.

Money, J., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (1972).  Man & Woman, Boy & Girl : The Differentiation and Dimorphism of Gender Identity from Conception to Maturity. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Money, J., & Tucker, P. (1975). Sexual signatures: On being a man or a woman.

Further Information

• Case Study Approach
• Case Study Method
• Enhancing the Quality of Case Studies in Health Services Research
• “We do things together” A case study of “couplehood” in dementia
• Using mixed methods for evaluating an integrative approach to cancer care: a case study

• Books, Journals, Papers
• Guides & How To’s
• Life Around The World
• Research Methods
• Functionalism
• Postmodernism
• Social Constructionism
• Structuralism
• Symbolic Interactionism
• Sociology Theorists
• General Sociology
• Social Policy
• Social Work
• Sociology of Crime & Deviance
• Sociology of Art
• Sociology of Dance
• Sociology of Food
• Sociology of Sport
• Sociology of Disability
• Sociology of Economics
• Sociology of Education
• Sociology of Emotion
• Sociology of Family & Relationships
• Sociology of Gender
• Sociology of Health
• Sociology of Identity
• Sociology of Ideology
• Sociology of Inequalities
• Sociology of Knowledge
• Sociology of Language
• Sociology of Law
• Sociology of Anime
• Sociology of Film
• Sociology of Gaming
• Sociology of Literature
• Sociology of Music
• Sociology of TV
• Sociology of Migration
• Sociology of Nature & Environment
• Sociology of Politics
• Sociology of Power
• Sociology of Race & Ethnicity
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Sexuality
• Sociology of Social Movements
• Sociology of Technology
• Sociology of the Life Course
• Sociology of Violence & Conflict
• Sociology of Work
• Sociology of Travel & Tourism
• Urban Sociology
• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions

Understanding the Case Study Method in Sociology

Table of Contents

Definition and purpose of case studies, types of case studies, methodological approaches in case studies.

• Advantages of Case Study Methods
• Limitations of Case Study Methods
• Applications of Case Study Methods in Sociology

The case study method is a research strategy often employed in the social sciences, including sociology, to investigate a phenomenon within its real-life context. This approach allows for a deep, multifaceted exploration of complex issues, making it an invaluable tool for sociologists. By focusing on a single case or a small number of cases, researchers can gather detailed and nuanced data, which can then be used to develop or test theories. This essay will provide an overview of the case study method, its applications, advantages, and limitations, and illustrate how it can be used effectively in sociological research.

Understanding Case Studies

A case study is an in-depth examination of a single instance or event—a ‘case’—which could be an individual, group, organization, community, or even a nation. The case study method is not confined to a particular type of data collection or analysis but rather encompasses a variety of techniques to gather comprehensive information about the case in question. This method is particularly useful for studying phenomena in their natural settings, allowing researchers to capture the complexities and intricacies of social life.

Purpose and Importance

The primary purpose of a case study is to gain a deep understanding of the subject under investigation. Case studies are particularly effective in exploring new or under-researched areas where the boundaries between the phenomenon and context are not clearly evident. They enable researchers to explore the ‘how’ and ‘why’ questions, providing insights that might not be achievable through other research methods. By focusing on specific instances, case studies can reveal the underlying mechanisms and processes that drive social phenomena, offering rich, qualitative insights that can inform broader sociological theories and practices.

Exploratory Case Studies

Exploratory case studies are conducted to identify research questions and hypotheses for further study. They are often the preliminary step in a research project, providing a basis for developing more detailed research plans. These case studies are useful for gathering initial data and insights, which can help shape the direction of future research.

Descriptive Case Studies

Descriptive case studies aim to provide a detailed, accurate account of the case under investigation. These studies focus on describing the characteristics and context of the case, often with the goal of illustrating the application of theories in real-life scenarios. Descriptive case studies are valuable for presenting a comprehensive picture of the phenomenon, enabling a better understanding of its complexity.

Explanatory Case Studies

Explanatory case studies are used to explore causation and uncover the underlying mechanisms of a phenomenon. These studies seek to explain the ‘how’ and ‘why’ questions, providing insights into the causal relationships and processes at play. Explanatory case studies are particularly useful in testing hypotheses and theories, offering a detailed examination of the factors that contribute to a specific outcome.

Intrinsic Case Studies

Intrinsic case studies are conducted when the researcher has a genuine interest in the case itself, rather than in generalizing findings to other cases. These studies focus on understanding the unique aspects and significance of the specific case, often highlighting its distinctiveness and individuality. Intrinsic case studies are valuable for exploring cases that are particularly unusual or noteworthy, providing insights that might not be applicable to other contexts.

Instrumental Case Studies

Instrumental case studies are conducted to gain a broader understanding of a particular issue or phenomenon. The case is used as a tool to provide insights into a larger question or theory. In these studies, the case itself is of secondary interest, serving as a means to an end. Instrumental case studies are useful for illustrating broader theoretical concepts and for drawing generalizable conclusions from specific instances.

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Mr Edwards has a PhD in sociology and 10 years of experience in sociological knowledge

Related Articles

Ethnomethodology: An Outline and Explanation

Ethnomethodology, originating from the field of sociology, is a distinctive methodological approach that investigates the everyday methods individuals use to...

Understanding Heuristic Devices in Sociology

In the realm of sociology, a heuristic device is an invaluable conceptual tool that aids in the exploration, explanation, and...

Understanding Casework in Sociology

Understanding Cash Crops in Sociology

Understanding Cathexis in Sociology

Get the latest sociology.

Would you be interested in enrolling in courses from Easy Sociology?

Recommended

Understanding Cultural Transmission Theory in Sociology

Understanding Deforestation: Causes, Impacts, and Solutions

24 hour trending.

Understanding the Concept of ‘Community’ in Sociology

The significance of customs in society: shaping behavior, order, and cultural identity, the work and contributions of emile durkheim in sociology, the effect of neoliberalism on education, what is a social actor exploring the concept in sociology.

Easy Sociology makes sociology as easy as possible. Our aim is to make sociology accessible for everybody. © 2023 Easy Sociology

© 2023 Easy Sociology

• Customer Reviews
• Extended Essays
• IB Internal Assessment
• Theory of Knowledge
• Literature Review
• Dissertations
• Essay Writing
• Research Writing
• Assignment Help
• Capstone Projects
• College Application
• Online Class

Case Study Method: Definition, Research Types, Advantages

by  Antony W

May 29, 2024

Case study method, or simply case study research methodology, is a technique that employs investigative inquiry to get data from specific individuals, organizations, groups, events, or demography.

Every participant in a case study method gets a similar engagement with hopes that he or she will provide information that helps with the discovery of novel insights on patterns, ideas, or hypothesis.

What’s The Origin of Case Study Method?

Frederic Le Play in France developed the case study method in sociology in 1829. Field workers would stay with families for a specific time and gather significant data such as income, expenditure, and interaction to understand the family in question.

The case study method was equally popular in clinical medicine, as it helped to generate, analyze, and support hypotheses .

Researchers adapted and integrated the technique to other sectors because of the benefits it uncovered in sociology, anthropology, and clinical medicine. The technique allows for the analysis of outcome through suggested decisions, procedures, and outcomes. 

What Research Types are Used in Case Study Method?

Your case study can be collective, descriptive, exploratory, explanatory, instrumental, or intrinsic.

These case study types require a comprehensive research methodology, which refers to procedures and techniques used to process and evaluate data to solve a problem and achieve a specific goal.

There are 2 types of research approaches for case studies: qualitative and quantitative research . These methods focus on different goals, data, and study.

Qualitative Research for Case Study

Qualitative research focuses on the collection and analysis of non-numerical data and it mostly applies to health sciences, anthropology, history, sociology, and education.

Examples of non-numerical data include audio, text, and video. You can collect qualitative data from focus groups, interviews, surveys, and observations.

Qualitative research for case studies enables you to generate new ideas and helpful insights with relevance and meaning.

Quantitative Research for Case Study

Quantitative research focuses on the collection and analysis of numbers, and it’s common in marketing, psychology, political science, economics, and sociology. Researchers use qualitative research to measure relationships and to test and track averages and patterns.

To do a comprehensive quantitative research:

• Come up with a theory.
• Develop a hypothesis.
• Create a research pattern.
• Operationalize a concept.
• Find a research environment (site).
• Choose your responders.
• Gather, process, and analyze data.
• Record your key findings and publish the results.

What are the Advantages of Case Study Methodology?

The following are the six advantages of the case study methodology:

1. Detailed Examination of a Specific Unit

The case study method enables researchers to document independently verifiable data from firsthand observations. The results provide information on the input mechanism that contributes to a proposed explanation under consideration.

2. Formation of Hypothesis

Researchers use the case study method to test a proposed hypothesis . More often than not, the information acquired from the study may inspire the formation of new concepts and allow further research because it supports change in social and physical settings.

You may collect a comprehensive data set depending on your ability and the openness of the study participants.

3. Constant Examination of Facts

You can use the case study methodology to examine facts about a social group continuously. The constant examination of facts ensures no disruption compromises the authenticity of the data obtained for the project.

Here, researchers don’t need to make assumptions when making conclusions from the collected data, thus ensuring the long-term validity of the findings. The conclusion made becomes significant to both sides of the equation, as it may confirm or reject the theory under investigation.

The constant examination of facts in case study methodology is subject to inefficiency because of the sheer volume of data under examination. Therefore, researchers have the responsibility to determine what information is helpful and what is insignificant.

4. Case Study Method Supports Comparison

Every demographic thinks, behaves, and responds to stimuli in unique ways, but each member of the group will contribute a little portion to a whole. Ideally, individual insights from different settings are a culmination of unique human experiences.

In this case, the case study method allows researchers to compare information from each demographic group, leading to ideas that either support or disapprove a theory.

5. Support for Knowledge Expansion

Researchers can use the case study methodology to expand their knowledge through analysis thanks to the range of methods used to collect data and evaluate hypothesis.

Many researchers collect data from interviews and observations, but even surveys can be just as useful. They may record participants’ experiences and use the information to analyze behavior and decisions. In some instances, a researcher may use memory test and experimental activities to predict how social groups would interact with or respond to given situations.

The information collected then serves to confirm the hypothesized possibilities.

6. Data Sampling Isn’t a Requirement

The case study method looks at social units holistically rather than isolating and analyzing individual data pieces. Therefore, the technique doesn’t require any sampling. The case study method supports the proposition under examination, as it transforms views into facts by validating or rejecting ideas that outside observers may use.

You may heed to specific incidences or results based on broader behavior or concepts. However, the study itself will not sample such instance. The methodology looks at the larger picture instead.

Where Can I Get Help With Case Study Writing?

You can get help with case study writing from Help for Assessment. We have the best case study writers who are only a click away to get you the writing you need to complete your paper on time.

It doesn’t matter if your deadline is closing in or you haven’t started working on the project yet. We can take you from a completely blank page to a well-written document before your due date. 

Help for Assessment charges $12.99 to $40 per page depending on the urgency. You get up to 10% discount if you’re new to this platform. So you can save money and still benefit from the convenience of our custom writing.

About the author 

Antony W is a professional writer and coach at Help for Assessment. He spends countless hours every day researching and writing great content filled with expert advice on how to write engaging essays, research papers, and assignments.

Log in using your username and password

• Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
• Latest content
• Current issue
• Write for Us
• BMJ Journals

You are here

• Volume 21, Issue 1
• What is a case study?
• Article Text
• Article info
• Citation Tools
• Rapid Responses
• Article metrics

• Roberta Heale 1 ,
• Alison Twycross 2
• 1 School of Nursing , Laurentian University , Sudbury , Ontario , Canada
• 2 School of Health and Social Care , London South Bank University , London , UK
• Correspondence to Dr Roberta Heale, School of Nursing, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON P3E2C6, Canada; rheale{at}laurentian.ca

https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2017-102845

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

What is it?

Case study is a research methodology, typically seen in social and life sciences. There is no one definition of case study research. 1 However, very simply… ‘a case study can be defined as an intensive study about a person, a group of people or a unit, which is aimed to generalize over several units’. 1 A case study has also been described as an intensive, systematic investigation of a single individual, group, community or some other unit in which the researcher examines in-depth data relating to several variables. 2

Often there are several similar cases to consider such as educational or social service programmes that are delivered from a number of locations. Although similar, they are complex and have unique features. In these circumstances, the evaluation of several, similar cases will provide a better answer to a research question than if only one case is examined, hence the multiple-case study. Stake asserts that the cases are grouped and viewed as one entity, called the quintain . 6  ‘We study what is similar and different about the cases to understand the quintain better’. 6

The steps when using case study methodology are the same as for other types of research. 6 The first step is defining the single case or identifying a group of similar cases that can then be incorporated into a multiple-case study. A search to determine what is known about the case(s) is typically conducted. This may include a review of the literature, grey literature, media, reports and more, which serves to establish a basic understanding of the cases and informs the development of research questions. Data in case studies are often, but not exclusively, qualitative in nature. In multiple-case studies, analysis within cases and across cases is conducted. Themes arise from the analyses and assertions about the cases as a whole, or the quintain, emerge. 6

Benefits and limitations of case studies

If a researcher wants to study a specific phenomenon arising from a particular entity, then a single-case study is warranted and will allow for a in-depth understanding of the single phenomenon and, as discussed above, would involve collecting several different types of data. This is illustrated in example 1 below.

Using a multiple-case research study allows for a more in-depth understanding of the cases as a unit, through comparison of similarities and differences of the individual cases embedded within the quintain. Evidence arising from multiple-case studies is often stronger and more reliable than from single-case research. Multiple-case studies allow for more comprehensive exploration of research questions and theory development. 6

Despite the advantages of case studies, there are limitations. The sheer volume of data is difficult to organise and data analysis and integration strategies need to be carefully thought through. There is also sometimes a temptation to veer away from the research focus. 2 Reporting of findings from multiple-case research studies is also challenging at times, 1 particularly in relation to the word limits for some journal papers.

Examples of case studies

Example 1: nurses’ paediatric pain management practices.

One of the authors of this paper (AT) has used a case study approach to explore nurses’ paediatric pain management practices. This involved collecting several datasets:

Observational data to gain a picture about actual pain management practices.

Questionnaire data about nurses’ knowledge about paediatric pain management practices and how well they felt they managed pain in children.

Questionnaire data about how critical nurses perceived pain management tasks to be.

These datasets were analysed separately and then compared 7–9 and demonstrated that nurses’ level of theoretical did not impact on the quality of their pain management practices. 7 Nor did individual nurse’s perceptions of how critical a task was effect the likelihood of them carrying out this task in practice. 8 There was also a difference in self-reported and observed practices 9 ; actual (observed) practices did not confirm to best practice guidelines, whereas self-reported practices tended to.

Example 2: quality of care for complex patients at Nurse Practitioner-Led Clinics (NPLCs)

The other author of this paper (RH) has conducted a multiple-case study to determine the quality of care for patients with complex clinical presentations in NPLCs in Ontario, Canada. 10 Five NPLCs served as individual cases that, together, represented the quatrain. Three types of data were collected including:

Review of documentation related to the NPLC model (media, annual reports, research articles, grey literature and regulatory legislation).

Interviews with nurse practitioners (NPs) practising at the five NPLCs to determine their perceptions of the impact of the NPLC model on the quality of care provided to patients with multimorbidity.

Chart audits conducted at the five NPLCs to determine the extent to which evidence-based guidelines were followed for patients with diabetes and at least one other chronic condition.

The three sources of data collected from the five NPLCs were analysed and themes arose related to the quality of care for complex patients at NPLCs. The multiple-case study confirmed that nurse practitioners are the primary care providers at the NPLCs, and this positively impacts the quality of care for patients with multimorbidity. Healthcare policy, such as lack of an increase in salary for NPs for 10 years, has resulted in issues in recruitment and retention of NPs at NPLCs. This, along with insufficient resources in the communities where NPLCs are located and high patient vulnerability at NPLCs, have a negative impact on the quality of care. 10

These examples illustrate how collecting data about a single case or multiple cases helps us to better understand the phenomenon in question. Case study methodology serves to provide a framework for evaluation and analysis of complex issues. It shines a light on the holistic nature of nursing practice and offers a perspective that informs improved patient care.

• Gustafsson J
• Calanzaro M
• Sandelowski M

Competing interests None declared.

Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Read the full text or download the PDF:

• Open access
• Published: 10 August 2024

How can health systems approach reducing health inequalities? An in-depth qualitative case study in the UK

• Charlotte Parbery-Clark 1 ,
• Lorraine McSweeney 2 ,
• Joanne Lally 3 &
• Sarah Sowden 4  

BMC Public Health volume  24 , Article number:  2168 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

250 Accesses

Metrics details

Addressing socioeconomic inequalities in health and healthcare, and reducing avoidable hospital admissions requires integrated strategy and complex intervention across health systems. However, the understanding of how to create effective systems to reduce socio-economic inequalities in health and healthcare is limited. The aim was to explore and develop a system’s level understanding of how local areas address health inequalities with a focus on avoidable emergency admissions.

In-depth case study using qualitative investigation (documentary analysis and key informant interviews) in an urban UK local authority. Interviewees were identified using snowball sampling. Documents were retrieved via key informants and web searches of relevant organisations. Interviews and documents were analysed independently based on a thematic analysis approach.

Interviews ( n  = 14) with wide representation from local authority ( n  = 8), NHS ( n  = 5) and voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE) sector ( n  = 1) with 75 documents (including from NHS, local authority, VCSE) were included. Cross-referenced themes were understanding the local context, facilitators of how to tackle health inequalities: the assets, and emerging risks and concerns. Addressing health inequalities in avoidable admissions per se was not often explicitly linked by either the interviews or documents and is not yet embedded into practice. However, a strong coherent strategic integrated population health management plan with a system’s approach to reducing health inequalities was evident as was collective action and involving people, with links to a “strong third sector”. Challenges reported include structural barriers and threats, the analysis and accessibility of data as well as ongoing pressures on the health and care system.

We provide an in-depth exploration of how a local area is working to address health and care inequalities. Key elements of this system’s working include fostering strategic coherence, cross-agency working, and community-asset based approaches. Areas requiring action included data sharing challenges across organisations and analytical capacity to assist endeavours to reduce health and care inequalities. Other areas were around the resilience of the system including the recruitment and retention of the workforce. More action is required to embed reducing health inequalities in avoidable admissions explicitly in local areas with inaction risking widening the health gap.

Highlights:

• Reducing health inequalities in avoidable hospital admissions is yet to be explicitly linked in practice and is an important area to address.

• Understanding the local context helps to identify existing assets and threats including the leverage points for action.

• Requiring action includes building the resilience of our complex systems by addressing structural barriers and threats as well as supporting the workforce (training and wellbeing with improved retention and recruitment) in addition to the analysis and accessibility of data across the system.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The health of our population is determined by the complex interaction of several factors which are either non-modifiable (such as age, genetics) or modifiable (such as the environment, social, economic conditions in which we live, our behaviours as well as our access to healthcare and its quality) [ 1 ]. Health inequalities are the avoidable and unfair systematic differences in health and healthcare across different population groups explained by the differences in distribution of power, wealth and resources which drive the conditions of daily life [ 2 , 3 ]. Essentially, health inequalities arise due to the systematic differences of the factors that influence our health. To effectively deal with most public health challenges, including reducing health inequalities and improving population health, broader integrated approaches [ 4 ] and an emphasis on systems is required [ 5 , 6 ] . A system is defined as ‘the set of actors, activities, and settings that are directly or indirectly perceived to have influence in or be affected by a given problem situation’ (p.198) [ 7 ]. In this case, the ‘given problem situation' is reducing health inequalities with a focus on avoidable admissions. Therefore, we must consider health systems, which are the organisations, resources and people aiming to improve or maintain health [ 8 , 9 ] of which health services provision is an aspect. In this study, the system considers NHS bodies, Integrated Care Systems, Local Authority departments, and the voluntary and community sector in a UK region.

A plethora of theories [ 10 ], recommended policies [ 3 , 11 , 12 , 13 ], frameworks [ 1 , 14 , 15 ], and tools [ 16 ] exist to help understand the existence of health inequalities as well as provide suggestions for improvement. However, it is reported that healthcare leaders feel under-skilled to reduce health inequalities [ 17 ]. A lack of clarity exists on how to achieve a system’s multi-agency coherence to reduce health inequalities systematically [ 17 , 18 ]. This is despite some countries having legal obligations to have a regard to the need to attend to health and healthcare inequalities. For example, the Health and Social Care Act 2012 [ 19 ], in England, mandated Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs), now transferred to Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) [ 20 ], to ‘have a regard to the need to reduce inequalities between patients with respect to their ability to access health services, and reduce inequalities between patients with respect to the outcomes achieved for them by the provision of health services’. The wider determinants of health must also be considered. For example, local areas have a mandatory requirement to have a joint strategic needs assessment (JSNA) and joint health and wellbeing strategy (JHWS) whose purpose is to ‘improve the health and wellbeing of the local community and reduce inequalities for all ages' [ 21 ] This includes addressing the wider determinants of health [ 21 ]. Furthermore, the hospital care costs to the NHS associated with socioeconomic inequalities has been previously reported at £4.8 billion a year due to excess hospitalisations [ 22 ]. Avoidable emergency admissions are admissions into hospital that are considered to be preventable with high-quality ambulatory care [ 23 ]. Both ambulatory care sensitive conditions (where effective personalised care based in the community can aid the prevention of needing an admission) and urgent care sensitive conditions (where a system on the whole should be able to treat and manage without an admission) are considered within this definition [ 24 ] (encompassing more than 100 International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes). The disease burden sits disproportionately with our most disadvantaged communities, therefore highlighting the importance of addressing inequalities in hospital pressures in a concerted manner [ 25 , 26 ].

Research examining one component of an intervention, or even one part of the system, [ 27 ] or which uses specific research techniques to control for the system’s context [ 28 ] are considered as having limited use for identifying the key ingredients to achieve better population health and wellbeing [ 5 , 28 ]. Instead, systems thinking considers how the system’s components and sub-components interconnect and interrelate within and between each other (and indeed other systems) to gain an understanding of the mechanisms by which things work [ 29 , 30 ]. Complex interventions or work programmes may perform differently in varying contexts and through different mechanisms, and therefore cannot simply be replicated from one context to another to automatically achieve the same outcomes. Ensuring that research into systems and systems thinking considers real-world context, such as where individuals live, where policies are created and interventions are delivered, is vital [ 5 ]. How the context and implementation of complex or even simple interventions interact is viewed as becoming increasingly important [ 31 , 32 ]. Case study research methodology is founded on the ‘in-depth exploration of complex phenomena in their natural, or ‘real-life’, settings’ (p.2) [ 33 ]. Case study approaches can deepen the understanding of complexity addressing the ‘how’, ‘what’ and ‘why’ questions in a real-life context [ 34 ]. Researchers have highlighted the importance of engaging more deeply with case-based study methodology [ 31 , 33 ]. Previous case study research has shown promise [ 35 ] which we build on by exploring a systems lens to consider the local area’s context [ 16 ] within which the work is implemented. By using case-study methodology, our study aimed to explore and develop an in-depth understanding of how a local area addresses health inequalities, with a focus on avoidable hospital admissions. As part of this, systems processes were included.

Study design

This in-depth case study is part of an ongoing larger multiple (collective [ 36 ]) case study approach. An instrumental approach [ 34 ] was taken allowing an in-depth investigation of an issue, event or phenomenon, in its natural real-life context; referred to as a ‘naturalistic’ design [ 34 ]. Ethics approval was obtained by Newcastle University’s Ethics Committee (ref 13633/2020).

Study selection

This case study, alongside the other three cases, was purposively [ 36 ] chosen considering overall deprivation level of the area (Indices of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) [ 37 ]), their urban/rural location, differing geographical spread across the UK (highlighted in patient and public feedback and important for considering the North/South health divide [ 38 ]), and a pragmatic judgement of likely ability to achieve the depth of insight required [ 39 ]. In this paper, we report the findings from one of the case studies, an urban local authority in the Northern region of the UK with high levels of socioeconomic disadvantage. This area was chosen for this in-depth case analysis due to high-level of need, and prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (2009-2018) had experienced a trend towards reducing socioeconomic inequalities in avoidable hospital admission rates between neighbourhoods within the local area [ 40 ]. Thereby this case study represents an ‘unusual’ case [ 41 ] to facilitate learning regarding what is reported and considered to be the key elements required to reduce health inequalities, including inequalities in avoidable admissions, in a local area.

Semi-structured interviews

The key informants were identified iteratively through the documentary analysis and in consultation with the research advisory group. Initially board level committee members (including lay, managerial, and clinical members) within relevant local organisations were purposively identified. These individuals were systems leaders charged with the remit of tackling health inequalities and therefore well placed to identify both key personnel and documents. Snowball sampling [ 42 ] was undertaken thereafter whereby interviewees helped to identify additional key informants within the local system who were working on health inequalities, including avoidable emergency admissions, at a systems level. Interview questions were based on an iteratively developed topic guide (supplementary data 1), informed from previous work’s findings [ 43 ] and the research advisory network’s input. A study information sheet was emailed to perspective interviewees, and participants were asked to complete an e-consent form using Microsoft Forms [ 42 ]. Each interviewee was interviewed by either L.M. or C.P.-C. using the online platforms Zoom or Teams, and lasted up to one hour. Participants were informed of interviewers’ role, workplace as well as purpose of the study. Interviewees were asked a range of questions including any work relating to reducing health inequalities, particularly avoidable emergency admissions, within the last 5 years. Brief notes were taken, and the interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and anonymised.

Documentary analysis

The documentary analysis followed the READ approach [ 44 ]. Any documents from the relevant local/regional area with sections addressing health inequalities and/or avoidable emergency admissions, either explicitly stated or implicitly inferred, were included. A list of core documents was chosen, including the local Health and Wellbeing Strategy (Table 1 ). Subsequently, other documents were identified by snowballing from these core documents and identification by the interviewees. All document types were within scope if produced/covered a period within 5 years (2017-2022), including documents in the public domain or not as well as documents pertaining to either a regional, local and neighbourhood level. This 5-year period was a pragmatic decision in line with the interviews and considered to be a balance of legacy and relevance. Attempts were made to include the final version of each document, where possible/applicable, otherwise the most up-to-date version or version available was used.

An Excel spreadsheet data extraction tool was adapted with a priori criteria [ 44 ] to extract the data. This tool included contextual information (such as authors, target area and document’s purpose). Also, information based on previous research on addressing socioeconomic inequalities in avoidable emergency admissions, such as who stands to benefit, was extracted [ 43 ]. Additionally, all documents were summarised according to a template designed according to the research’s aims. Data extraction and summaries were undertaken by L.M. and C.P.-C. A selection was doubled coded to enhance validity and any discrepancies were resolved by discussion.

Interviews and documents were coded and analysed independently based on a thematic analysis approach [ 45 ], managed by NVivo software. A combination of ‘interpretive’ and ‘positivist’ stance [ 34 , 46 ] was taken which involved understanding meanings/contexts and processes as perceived from different perspectives (interviewees and documents). This allowed for an understanding of individual and shared social meanings/reasonings [ 34 , 36 ]. For the documentary analysis, a combination of both content and thematic analysis as described by Bowen [ 47 ] informed by Braun and Clarke’s approach to thematic analysis [ 45 ] was used. This type of content analysis does not include the typical quantification but rather a review of the document for pertinent and meaningful passages of text/other data [ 47 ]. Both an inductive and deductive approach for the documentary analysis’ coding [ 46 , 47 ] was chosen. The inductive approach was developed a posteriori; the deductive codes being informed by the interviews and previous findings from research addressing socioeconomic inequalities in avoidable emergency admissions [ 43 ]. In line with qualitative epistemological approach to enquiry, the interview and documentary findings were viewed as ‘truths’ in themselves with the acceptance that multiple realities can co-exist [ 48 ]. The analysis of each set of themes (with subthemes) from the documentary analysis and interviews were cross-referenced and integrated with each other to provide a cohesive in-depth analysis [ 49 ] by generating thematic maps to explore the relationships between the themes. The codes, themes and thematic maps were peer-reviewed continually with regular meetings between L.M., C.P.-C., J.L. and S.S. Direct quotes are provided from the interviews and documentary analysis. Some quotes from the documents are paraphrased to protect anonymity of the case study after following a set process considering a range of options. This involved searching each quote from the documentary analysis in Google and if the quote was found in the first page of the result, we shortened extracts and repeated the process. Where the shortened extracts were still identifiable, we were required to paraphrase that quote. Each paraphrased quote and original was shared and agreed with all the authors reducing the likelihood of inadvertently misinterpreting or misquoting. Where multiple components over large bodies of text were present in the documents, models were used to evidence the broadness, for example, using Dahlgren’s and Whitehead’s model of health determinants [ 1 ]. Due to the nature of the study, transcripts and findings were not shared with participants for checking but will be shared in a dissemination workshop in 2024.

Patient and public involvement and engagement

Four public contributors from the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Research Design Service (RDS) North East and North Cumbria (NENC) Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) panel have been actively engaged in this research from its inception. They have been part of the research advisory group along with professional stakeholders and were involved in the identification of the sampling frame’s key criteria. Furthermore, a diverse group of public contributors has been actively involved in other parts of the project including developing the moral argument around action by producing a public facing resource exploring what health inequalities mean to people and public views of possible solutions [ 50 ].

Semi-structured interviews: description

Sixteen participants working in health or social care, identified through the documentary analysis or snowballing, were contacted for interview; fourteen consented to participate. No further interviews were sought as data sufficiency was reached whereby no new information or themes were being identified. Participant roles were broken down by NHS ( n  = 5), local authority/council ( n  = 8), and voluntary, community and social enterprise (VSCE) ( n  = 1). To protect the participants’ anonymity, their employment titles/status are not disclosed. However, a broad spectrum of interviewees with varying roles from senior health system leadership (including strategic and commissioner roles) to roles within provider organisations and the VSCE sector were included.

Documentary analysis: description

75 documents were reviewed with documents considering regional ( n  = 20), local ( n  = 64) or neighbourhood ( n  = 2) area with some documents covering two or more areas. Table 2 summarises the respective number of each document type which included statutory documents to websites from across the system (NHS, local government and VSCE). 45 documents were named by interviewees and 42 documents were identified as either a core document or through snowballing from other documents. Of these, 12 documents were identified from both. The timescales of the documents varied and where possible to identify, was from 2014 to 2031.

Integrative analysis of the documentary analysis and interviews

The overarching themes encompass:

Understanding the local context

Facilitators to tacking health inequalities: the assets

Emerging risks and concerns

Figure 1 demonstrates the relationships between the main themes identified from the analysis for tackling health inequalities and improving health in this case study.

Diagram of the relationship between the key themes identified regarding tackling health inequalities and improving health in a local area informed by 2 previous work [ 14 , 51 ]. NCDs = non-communicable diseases; HI = health inequalities

Understanding the local context was discussed extensively in both the documents and the interviews. This was informed by local intelligence and data that was routinely collected, monitored, and analysed to help understand the local context and where inequalities lie. More bespoke, in-depth collection and analysis were also described to get a better understanding of the situation. This not only took the form of quantitative but also considered qualitative data with lived experience:

‛So, our data comes from going out to talk to people. I mean, yes, especially the voice of inequalities, those traditional mechanisms, like surveys, don't really work. And it's about going out to communities, linking in with third sector organisations, going out to communities, and just going out to listen…I think the more we can bring out those real stories. I mean, we find quotes really, really powerful in terms of helping people understand what it is that matters.’ (LP16).

However, there were limitations to the available data including the quality as well as having enough time to do the analysis justice. This resulted in difficulties in being able to fully understand the context to help identify and act on the required improvements.

‘A lack of available data means we cannot quantify the total number of vulnerable migrants in [region]’ (Document V).

‛So there’s lots of data. The issue is joining that data up and analysing it, and making sense of it. That’s where we don’t have the capacity.’ (LP15).

Despite the caveats, understanding the context and its data limitations were important to inform local priorities and approaches on tackling health inequalities. This understanding was underpinned by three subthemes which were understanding:

the population’s needs including identification of people at higher risk of worse health and health inequalities

the driving forces of those needs with acknowledgement of the impact of the wider determinants of health

the threats and barriers to physical and mental health, as well as wellbeing

Firstly, the population’s needs, including identification of people at higher risk of worse health and health inequalities, was important. This included considering risk factors, such as smoking, specific groups of people and who was presenting with which conditions. Between the interviews and documents, variation was seen between groups deemed at-risk or high-risk with the documents identifying a wider range. The groups identified across both included marginalised communities, such as ethnic minority groups, gypsy and travellers, refugees and asylum seekers as well as people/children living in disadvantaged area.

‘There are significant health inequalities in children with asthma between deprived and more affluent areas, and this is reflected in A&E admissions.' (Document J).

Secondly, the driving forces of those needs with acknowledgement of the impact of the wider determinants of health were described. These forces mapped onto Dahlgren’s and Whitehead’s model of health determinants [ 1 ] consisting of individual lifestyle factors, social and community networks, living and working conditions (which include access to health care services) as well as general socio-economic, cultural and environmental conditions across the life course.

…. at the centre of our approach considering the requirements to improve the health and wellbeing of our area are the wider determinants of health and wellbeing, acknowledging how factors, such as housing, education, the environment and economy, impact on health outcomes and wellbeing over people’s lifetime and are therefore pivotal to our ambition to ameliorate the health of the poorest the quickest. (Paraphrased Document P).

Thirdly, the threats and barriers to health included environmental risks, communicable diseases and associated challenges, non-communicable conditions and diseases, mental health as well as structural barriers. In terms of communicable diseases, COVID-19 predominated. The environmental risks included climate change and air pollution. Non-communicable diseases were considered as a substantial and increasing threat and encompassed a wide range of chronic conditions such as diabetes, and obesity.

‛Long term conditions are the leading causes of death and disability in [case study] and account for most of our health and care spending. Cases of cancer, diabetes, respiratory disease, dementia and cardiovascular disease will increase as the population of [case study] grows and ages.’ (Document A).

Structural barriers to accessing and using support and/or services for health and wellbeing were identified. These barriers included how the services are set up, such as some GP practices asking for proof of a fixed address or form of identification to register. For example:

Complicated systems (such as having to make multiple calls, the need to speak to many people/gatekeepers or to call at specific time) can be a massive barrier to accessing healthcare and appointments. This is the case particularly for people who have complex mental health needs or chaotic/destabilized circumstances. People who do not have stable housing face difficulties in registering for GP and other services that require an address or rely on post to communicate appointments. (Paraphrased Document R).

A structural threat regarding support and/or services for health and wellbeing was the sustainability of current funding with future uncertainty posing potential threats to the delivery of current services. This also affected the ability to adapt and develop the services, or indeed build new ones.

‛I would say the other thing is I have a beef [sic] [disagreement] with pilot studies or new innovations. Often soft funded, temporary funded, charity funded, partnership work run by enthusiasts. Me, I've done them, or supported people doing many of these. And they're great. They can make a huge impact on the individuals involved on that local area. You can see fantastic work. You get inspired and you want to stand up in a crowd and go, “Wahey, isn't this fantastic?” But actually the sad part of it is on these things, I've seen so many where we then see some good, positive work being done, but we can't make it permanent or we can't spread it because there's no funding behind it.’ (LP8).

Facilitators to tackling health inequalities: the assets

The facilitators for improving health and wellbeing and tackling health inequalities are considered as assets which were underpinned by values and principles.

Values driven supported by four key principles

Being values driven was an important concept and considered as the underpinning attitudes or beliefs that guide decision making [ 52 ]. Particularly, the system’s approach was underpinned by a culture and a system's commitment to tackle health inequalities across the documents and interviews. This was also demonstrated by how passionately and emotively some interviewees spoke about their work.

‛There's a really strong desire and ethos around understanding that we will only ever solve these problems as a system, not by individual organisations or even just part of the system working together. And that feels great.’ (LP3).

Other values driving the approach included accountability, justice, and equity. Reducing health inequalities and improving health were considered to be the right things to do. For example:

We feel strongly about social justice and being inclusive, wishing to reflect the diversity of [case study]. We campaign on subjects that are important to people who are older with respect and kindness. (Paraphrased Document O).

Four key principles were identified that crosscut the assets which were:

Shared vision

Strong partnership

Asset-based approaches

Willingness and ability to act on learning

The mandated strategy, identifying priorities for health and wellbeing for the local population with the required actions, provided the shared vision across each part of the system, and provided the foundations for the work. This shared vision was repeated consistently in the documents and interviews from across the system.

[Case study] will be a place where individuals who have the lowest socioeconomic status will ameliorate their health the quickest. [Case study] will be a place for good health and compassion for all people, regardless of their age. (Paraphrased Document A).

‛One thing that is obviously becoming stronger and stronger is the focus on health inequalities within all of that, and making sure that we are helping people and provide support to people with the poorest health as fast as possible, so that agenda hasn’t shifted.’ (LP7).

This drive to embed the reduction of health inequalities was supported by clear new national guidance encapsulated by the NHS Core20PLUS5 priorities. Core20PLUS5 is the UK's approach to support a system to improve their healthcare inequalities [ 53 ]. Additionally, the system's restructuring from Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) to Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) and formalisation of the now statutory Integrated Care Systems (ICS) in England was also reported to facilitate the driving of further improvement in health inequalities. These changes at a regional and local level helped bring key partners across the system (NHS and local government among others) to build upon their collective responsibility for improving health and reducing health inequalities for their area [ 54 ].

‛I don’t remember the last time we’ve had that so clear, or the last time that health inequalities has had such a prominent place, both in the NHS planning guidance or in the NHS contract. ’ (LP15). ‛The Health and Care Act has now got a, kind of, pillar around health inequalities, the new establishment of ICPs and ICBs, and also the planning guidance this year had a very clear element on health inequalities.’ (LP12)

A strong partnership and collaborative team approach across the system underpinned the work from the documents and included the reoccurrence of the concept that this case study acted as one team: ‘Team [case study]'.

Supporting one another to ensure [case study] is the best it can be: Team [case study]. It involves learning, sharing ideas as well as organisations sharing assets and resources, authentic partnerships, and striving for collective impact (environmental and social) to work towards shared goals . (Paraphrased Document B).

This was corroborated in the interviews as working in partnership to tackle health inequalities was considered by the interviewees as moving in the right direction. There were reports that the relationship between local government, health care and the third sector had improved in recent years which was still an ongoing priority:

‘I think the only improvement I would cite, which is not an improvement in terms of health outcomes, but in terms of how we work across [case study] together has moved on quite a lot, in terms of teams leads and talking across us, and how we join up on things, rather than see ourselves all as separate bodies' (LP15).

‘I think the relationship between local authorities and health and the third sector, actually, has much more parity and esteem than it had before.' (LP11)

The approaches described above were supported by all health and care partners signing up to principles around partnership; it is likely this has helped foster the case study's approach. This also builds on the asset-based approaches that were another key principle building on co-production and co-creation which is described below.

We begin with people : instead of doing things to people or for them, we work with them, augmenting the skills, assets and strength of [case study]’s people, workforce and carers. We achieve : actions are focused on over words and by using intelligence, every action hones in on the actual difference that we will make to ameliorate outcomes, quality and spend [case study]’s money wisely; We are Team [case study ]: having kindness, working as one organisation, taking responsibility collectively and delivering on what we agreed. Problems are discussed with a high challenge and high support attitude. (Paraphrased Document D).

At times, the degree to which the asset-based approaches were embedded differed from the documents compared to the interviews, even when from the same part of the system. For example, the documents often referred to the asset-based approach as having occurred whilst interviewees viewed it more as a work in progress.

‘We have re-designed many of our services to focus on needs-led, asset-based early intervention and prevention, and have given citizens more control over decisions that directly affect them .’ (Document M).

‘But we’re trying to take an asset-based approach, which is looking at the good stuff in communities as well. So the buildings, the green space, the services, but then also the social capital stuff that happens under the radar.’ (LP11).

A willingness to learn and put in action plans to address the learning were present. This enables future proofing by building on what is already in place to build the capacity, capability and flexibility of the system. This was particularly important for developing the workforce as described below.

‘So we’ve got a task and finish group set up, […] So this group shows good practice and is a space for people to discuss some of the challenges or to share what interventions they are doing around the table, and also look at what other opportunities that they have within a region or that we could build upon and share and scale.’ (LP12).

These assets that are considered as facilitators are divided into four key levels which are the system, services and support, communities and individuals, and workforce which are discussed in turn below.

Firstly, the system within this case study was made up of many organisations and partnerships within the NHS, local government, VSCE sector and communities. The interviewees reported the presence of a strong VCSE sector which had been facilitated by the local council's commitment to funding this sector:

‘Within [case study], we have a brilliant third sector, the council has been longstanding funders of infrastructure in [case study], third sector infrastructure, to enable those links [of community engagement] to be made' (LP16).

In both the documents and interviews, a strong coherent strategic integrated population health management plan with a system’s approach to embed the reduction of health inequalities was evident. For example, on a system level regionally:

‘To contribute towards a reduction in health inequalities we will: take a system wide approach for improving outcomes for specific groups known to be affected by health inequalities, starting with those living in our most deprived communities….’ (Document H).

This case study’s approach within the system included using creative solutions and harnessing technology. This included making bold and inventive changes to improve how the city and the system linked up and worked together to improve health. For example, regeneration work within the city to ameliorate and transform healthcare facilities as well as certain neighbourhoods by having new green spaces, better transport links in order to improve city-wide innovation and collaboration (paraphrased Document F) were described. The changes were not only related to physical aspects of the city but also aimed at how the city digitally linked up. Being a leader in digital innovation to optimise the health benefits from technology and information was identified in several documents.

‘ Having the best connected city using digital technology to improve health and wellbeing in innovative ways.’ (Document G).

The digital approaches included ongoing development of a digitalised personalised care record facilitating access to the most up-to-date information to developing as well as having the ‘ latest, cutting edge technologies’ ( Document F) in hospital care. However, the importance of not leaving people behind by embedding digital alternatives was recognised in both the documents and interviews.

‘ We are trying to just embed the culture of doing an equity health impact assessment whenever you are bringing in a digital solution or a digital pathway, and that there is always an alternative there for people who don’t have the capability or capacity to use it. ’ (LP1).

The successful one hundred percent [redacted] programme is targeting some of our most digitally excluded citizens in [case study]. For our city to continue to thrive, we all need the appropriate skills, technology and support to get the most out of being online. (Paraphrased Document Q)

This all links in with the system that functions in a ‘place' which includes the importance of where people are born, grow, work and live. Working towards this place being welcoming and appealing was described both regionally and locally. This included aiming to make the case study the place of choice for people.

‘Making [case study] a centre for good growth becoming the place of choice in the UK to live, to study, for businesses to invest in, for people to come and work.’ (Document G).

Services and support

Secondly, a variety of available services and support were described from the local authority, NHS, and voluntary community sectors. Specific areas of work, such as local initiatives (including targeted work or campaigns for specific groups or specific health conditions) as well as parts of the system working together with communities collaboratively, were identified. This included a wide range of work being done such as avoiding delayed discharges or re-admissions, providing high quality affordable housing as well as services offering peer support.

‘We have a community health development programme called [redacted], that works with particular groups in deprived communities and ethnically diverse communities to work in a very trusted and culturally appropriate way on the things that they want to get involved with to support their health.’ (LP3 ).

It is worth noting that reducing health inequalities in avoidable admissions was not often explicitly specified in the documents or interviews. However, either specified or otherwise inferred, preventing ill health and improving access, experience, and outcomes were vital components to addressing inequalities. This was approached by working with communities to deliver services in communities that worked for all people. Having co-designed, accessible, equitable integrated services and support appeared to be key.

‘Reducing inequalities in unplanned admissions for conditions that could be cared for in the community and access to planned hospital care is key.’ (Document H)

Creating plans with people: understanding the needs of local population and designing joined-up services around these needs. (Paraphrased Document A).

‘ So I think a core element is engagement with your population, so that ownership and that co-production, if you're going to make an intervention, don't do it without because you might miss the mark. ’ (LP8).

Clear, consistent and appropriate communication that was trusted was considered important to improve health and wellbeing as well as to tackle health inequalities. For example, trusted community members being engaged to speak on the behalf of the service providers:

‘The messenger is more important than the message, sometimes.’ (LP11).

This included making sure the processes are in place so that the information is accessible for all, including people who have additional communication needs. This was considered as a work in progress in this case study.

‘I think for me, things do come down to those core things, of health, literacy, that digital exclusion and understanding the wider complexities of people.’ (LP12)

‘ But even more confusing if you've got an additional communication need. And we've done quite a lot of work around the accessible information standard which sounds quite dry, and doesn't sound very- but actually, it's fundamental in accessing health and care. And that is, that all health and care organisations should record your communication preferences. So, if I've got a learning disability, people should know. If I've got a hearing impairment, people should know. But the systems don’t record it, so blind people are getting sent letters for appointments, or if I've got hearing loss, the right provisions are not made for appointments. So, actually, we're putting up barriers before people even come in, or can even get access to services.’ (LP16).

Flexible, empowering, holistic care and support that was person-centric was more apparent in the documents than the interviews.

At the centre of our vision is having more people benefiting from the life chances currently enjoyed by the few to make [case study] a more equal place. Therefore, we accentuate the importance of good health, the requirement to boost resilience, and focus on prevention as a way of enabling higher quality service provision that is person-centred. [Paraphrased Document N).

Through this [work], we will give all children and young people in [case study], particularly if they are vulnerable and/or disadvantaged, a start in life that is empowering and enable them to flourish in a compassionate and lively city. [Paraphrased Document M].

Communities and individuals

Thirdly, having communities and individuals at the heart of the work appeared essential and viewed as crucial to nurture in this case study. The interconnectedness of the place, communities and individuals were considered a key part of the foundations for good health and wellbeing.

In [case study], our belief is that our people are our greatest strength and our most important asset. Wellbeing starts with people: our connections with our friends, family, and colleagues, our behaviour, understanding, and support for one another, as well as the environment we build to live in together . (Paraphrased Document A).

A recognition of the power of communities and individuals with the requirement to support that key principle of a strength-based approach was found. This involved close working with communities to help identify what was important, what was needed and what interventions would work. This could then lead to improved resilience and cohesion.

‛You can't make effective health and care decisions without having the voice of people at the centre of that. It just won't work. You won't make the right decisions.’ (LP16).

‘Build on the strengths in ourselves, our families, carers and our community; working with people, actively listening to what matters most to people, with a focus on what’s strong rather than what’s wrong’ (Document G).

Meaningful engagement with communities as well as strengths and asset-based approaches to ensure self-sufficiency and sustainability of communities can help communities flourish. This includes promoting friendships, building community resilience and capacity, and inspiring residents to find solutions to change the things they feel needs altering in their community . (Paraphrased Document B).

This close community engagement had been reported to foster trust and to lead to improvements in health.

‘But where a system or an area has done a lot of community engagement, worked really closely with the community, gained their trust and built a programme around them rather than just said, “Here it is. You need to come and use it now,” you can tell that has had the impact. ' (LP1).

Finally, workforce was another key asset; the documents raised the concept of one workforce across health and care. The key principles of having a shared vision, asset-based approaches and strong partnership were also present in this example:

By working together, the Health and Care sector makes [case study] the best area to not only work but also train for people of all ages. Opportunities for skills and jobs are provided with recruitment and engagement from our most disadvantaged communities, galvanizing the future’s health and care workforce. By doing this, we have a very skilled and diverse workforce we need to work with our people now as well as in the future. (Paraphrased Document E).

An action identified for the health and care system to address health inequalities in case study 1 was ‘ the importance of having an inclusive workforce trained in person-centred working practices ’ (Document R). Several ways were found to improve and support workforce skills development and embed awareness of health inequalities in practice and training. Various initiatives were available such as an interactive health inequalities toolkit, theme-related fellowships, platforms and networks to share learning and develop skills.

‛We've recently launched a [redacted] Fellowship across [case study’s region], and we've got a number of clinicians and managers on that………. We've got training modules that we've put on across [case study’s region], as well for health inequalities…we've got learning and web resources where we share good practice from across the system, so that is our [redacted] Academy.’ (LP2).

This case study also recognised the importance of considering the welfare of the workforce; being skilled was not enough. This had been recognised pre-pandemic but was seen as even more important post COVID-19 due to the impact that COVID-19 had on staff, particularly in health and social care.

‛The impacts of the pandemic cannot be underestimated; our colleagues and services are fatigued and still dealing with the pressures. This context makes it even more essential that we share the responsibility, learn from each other at least and collaborate with each other at best, and hold each other up to be the best we can.’ (Document U).

Concerns were raised such as the widening of health inequalities since the pandemic and cost of living crisis. Post-pandemic and Brexit, recruiting health, social care and third sector staff was compounding the capacity throughout this already heavily pressurised system.

In [case study], we have seen the stalling of life expectancy and worsening of the health inequality gap, which is expected to be compounded by the effects of the pandemic. (Paraphrased Document T)

‘I think key barriers, just the immense pressure on the system still really […] under a significant workload, catching up on activity, catching up on NHS Health Checks, catching up on long-term condition reviews. There is a significant strain on the system still in terms of catching up. It has been really difficult because of the impact of COVID.’ (LP7).

‘Workforce is a challenge, because the pipelines that we’ve got, we’ve got fewer people coming through many of them. And that’s not just particular to, I don't know, nursing, which is often talking talked [sic] about as a challenged area, isn't it? And of course, it is. But we’ve got similar challenges in social care, in third sector.’ (LP5).

The pandemic was reported to have increased pressures on the NHS and services not only in relation to staff capacity but also regarding increases in referrals to services, such as mental health. Access to healthcare changed during the pandemic increasing barriers for some:

‘I think people are just confused about where they're supposed to go, in terms of accessing health and care at the moment. It's really complex to understand where you're supposed to go, especially, at the moment, coming out of COVID, and the fact that GPs are not the accessible front door. You can't just walk into your GP anymore.’ (LP16).

‘Meeting this increased demand [for work related to reducing ethnic inequalities in mental health] is starting to prove a challenge and necessitates some discussion about future resourcing.’ (Document S)

Several ways were identified to aid effective adaptation and/or mitigation. This included building resilience such as developing the existing capacity, capability and flexibility of the system by learning from previous work, adapting structures and strengthening workforce development. Considerations, such as a commitment to Marmot Principles and how funding could/would contribute, were also discussed.

The funding’s [linked to Core20PLUS5] purpose is to help systems to ensure that health inequalities are not made worse when cost-savings or efficiencies are sought…The available data and insight are clear and [health inequalities are] likely to worsen in the short term, the delays generated by pandemic, the disproportionate effect of that on the most deprived and the worsening food and fuel poverty in all our places. (Paraphrased Document L).

Learning from the pandemic was thought to be useful as some working practices had altered during COVID-19 for the better, such as needing to continue to embed how the system had collaborated and resist old patterns of working:

‘So I think that emphasis between collaboration – extreme collaboration – which is what we did during COVID is great. I suppose the problem is, as we go back into trying to save money, we go back into our old ways of working, about working in silos. And I think we’ve got to be very mindful of that, and continue to work in a different way.’ (LP11).

Another area identified as requiring action, was the collection, analysis, sharing and use of data accessible by the whole system.

‘So I think there is a lot of data out there. It’s just how do we present that in such a way that it’s accessible to everyone as well, because I think sometimes, what happens is that we have one group looking at data in one format, but then how do we cascade that out?’ (LP12)

We aimed to explore a system’s level understanding of how a local area addresses health inequalities with a focus on avoidable emergency admissions using a case study approach. Therefore, the focus of our research was strategic and systematic approaches to inequalities reduction. Gaining an overview of what was occurring within a system is pertinent because local areas are required to have a regard to address health inequalities in their local areas [ 20 , 21 ]. Through this exploration, we also developed an understanding of the system's processes reported to be required. For example, an area requiring action was viewed as the accessibility and analysis of data. The case study described having health inequalities ‘at the heart of its health and wellbeing strategy ’ which was echoed across the documents from multiple sectors across the system. Evidence of a values driven partnership with whole systems working was centred on the importance of place and involving people, with links to a ‘strong third sector ’ . Working together to support and strengthen local assets (the system, services/support, communities/individuals, and the workforce) were vital components. This suggested a system’s committed and integrated approach to improve population health and reduce health inequalities as well as concerted effort to increase system resilience. However, there was juxtaposition at times with what the documents contained versus what interviewees spoke about, for example, the degree to which asset-based approaches were embedded.

Furthermore, despite having a priori codes for the documentary analysis and including specific questions around work being undertaken to reduce health inequalities in avoidable admissions in the interviews with key systems leaders, this explicit link was still very much under-developed for this case study. For example, how to reduce health inequalities in avoidable emergency admissions was not often specified in the documents but could be inferred from existing work. This included work around improving COVID-19 vaccine uptake in groups who were identified as being at high-risk (such as older people and socially excluded populations) by using local intelligence to inform where to offer local outreach targeted pop-up clinics. This limited explicit action linking reduction of health inequalities in avoidable emergency admissions was echoed in the interviews and it became clear as we progressed through the research that a focus on reduction of health inequalities in avoidable hospital admissions at a systems level was not a dominant aspect of people’s work. Health inequalities were viewed as a key part of the work but not necessarily examined together with avoidable admissions. A strengthened will to take action is reported, particularly around reducing health inequalities, but there were limited examples of action to explicitly reduce health inequalities in avoidable admissions. This gap in the systems thinking is important to highlight. When it was explicitly linked, upstream strategies and thinking were acknowledged as requirements to reduce health inequalities in avoidable emergency admissions.

Similar to our findings, other research have also found networks to be considered as the system’s backbone [ 30 ] as well as the recognition that communities need to be central to public health approaches [ 51 , 55 , 56 ]. Furthermore, this study highlighted the importance of understanding the local context by using local routine and bespoke intelligence. It demonstrated that population-based approaches to reduce health inequalities are complex, multi-dimensional and interconnected. It is not about one part of the system but how the whole system interlinks. The interconnectedness and interdependence of the system (and the relevant players/stakeholders) have been reported by other research [ 30 , 57 ], for example without effective exchange of knowledge and information, social networks and systems do not function optimally [ 30 ]. Previous research found that for systems to work effectively, management and transfer of knowledge needs to be collaborative [ 30 ], which was recognised in this case study as requiring action. By understanding the context, including the strengths and challenges, the support or action needed to overcome the barriers can be identified.

There are very limited number of case studies that explore health inequalities with a focus on hospital admissions. Of the existing research, only one part of the health system was considered with interviews looking at data trends [ 35 ]. To our knowledge, this research is the first to build on this evidence by encompassing the wider health system using wider-ranging interviews and documentary analysis. Ford et al. [ 35 ] found that geographical areas typically had plans to reduce total avoidable emergency admissions but not comprehensive plans to reduce health inequalities in avoidable emergency admissions. This approach may indeed widen health inequalities. Health inequalities have considerable health and costs impacts. Pertinently, the hospital care costs associated with socioeconomic inequalities being reported as £4.8 billion a year, mainly due to excess hospitalisations such as avoidable admissions [ 58 ] and the burden of disease lies disproportionately with our most disadvantaged communities, addressing inequalities in hospital pressures is required [ 25 , 26 ].

Implications for research and policy

Improvements to life expectancy have stalled in the UK with a widening of health inequalities [ 12 ]. Health inequalities are not inevitable; it is imperative that the health gap between the deprived and affluent areas is narrowed [ 12 ]. This research demonstrates the complexity and intertwining factors that are perceived to address health inequalities in an area. Despite the evidence of the cost (societal and individual) of avoidable admissions, explicit tackling of inequality in avoidable emergency admissions is not yet embedded into the system, therefore highlights an area for policy and action. This in-depth account and exploration of the characteristics of ‘whole systems’ working to address health inequalities, including where challenges remain, generated in this research will be instrumental for decision makers tasked with addressing health and care inequalities.

This research informs the next step of exploring each identified theme in more detail and moving beyond description to develop tools, using a suite of multidimensional and multidisciplinary methods, to investigate the effects of interventions on systems as previously highlighted by Rutter et al. [ 5 ].

Strengths and limitations

Documentary analysis is often used in health policy research but poorly described [ 44 ]. Furthermore, Yin reports that case study research is often criticised for not adhering to ‘systematic procedures’ p. 18 [ 41 ]. A clear strength of this study was the clearly defined boundary (in time and space) case as well as following a defined systematic approach, with critical thought and rationale provided at each stage [ 34 , 41 ]. A wide range and large number of documents were included as well as interviewees from across the system thereby resulting in a comprehensive case study. Integrating the analysis from two separate methodologies (interviews and documentary analysis), analysed separately before being combined, is also a strength to provide a coherent rich account [ 49 ]. We did not limit the reasons for hospital admission to enable a broad as possible perspective; this is likely to be a strength in this case study as this connection between health inequalities and avoidable hospital admissions was still infrequently made. However, for example, if a specific care pathway for a health condition had been highlighted by key informants this would have been explored.

Due to concerns about identifiability, we took several steps. These included providing a summary of the sectors that the interviewees and document were from but we were not able to specify which sectors each quote pertained. Additionally, some of the document quotes required paraphrasing. However, we followed a set process to ensure this was as rigorous as possible as described in the methods section. For example, where we were required to paraphrase, each paraphrased quote and original was shared and agreed with all the authors to reduce the likelihood to inadvertently misinterpreting or misquoting.

The themes are unlikely to represent an exhaustive list of the key elements requiring attention, but they represent the key themes that were identified using a robust methodological process. The results are from a single urban local authority with high levels of socioeconomic disadvantage in the North of England which may limit generalisability to different contexts. However, the findings are still generalisable to theoretical considerations [ 41 ]. Attempts to integrate a case study with a known framework can result in ‘force-fit’ [ 34 ] which we avoided by developing our own framework (Fig. 1 ) considering other existing models [ 14 , 59 ]. The results are unable to establish causation, strength of association, or direction of influence [ 60 ] and disentangling conclusively what works versus what is thought to work is difficult. The documents’ contents may not represent exactly what occurs in reality, the degree to which plans are implemented or why variation may occur or how variation may affect what is found [ 43 , 61 ]. Further research, such as participatory or non-participatory observation, could address this gap.

Conclusions

This case study provides an in-depth exploration of how local areas are working to address health and care inequalities, with a focus on avoidable hospital admissions. Key elements of this system’s reported approach included fostering strategic coherence, cross-agency working, and community-asset based working. An area requiring action was viewed as the accessibility and analysis of data. Therefore, local areas could consider the challenges of data sharing across organisations as well as the organisational capacity and capability required to generate useful analysis in order to create meaningful insights to assist work to reduce health and care inequalities. This would lead to improved understanding of the context including where the key barriers lie for a local area. Addressing structural barriers and threats as well as supporting the training and wellbeing of the workforce are viewed as key to building resilience within a system to reduce health inequalities. Furthermore, more action is required to embed reducing health inequalities in avoidable admissions explicitly in local areas with inaction risking widening the health gap.

Availability of data and materials

Individual participants’ data that underlie the results reported in this article and a data dictionary defining each field in the set are available to investigators whose proposed use of the data has been approved by an independent review committee for work. Proposals should be directed to [email protected] to gain access, data requestors will need to sign a data access agreement. Such requests are decided on a case by case basis.

Dahlgren G, Whitehead M. Policies and strategies to promote social equity in health. Sweden: Institute for Future Studies Stockholm; 1991.

Google Scholar  

Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH). Closing the Gap in a Generation: Health Equity Through Action on the Social Determinants of Health. Geneva: World Health Organisation; 2008.

Marmot M, et al. Fair Society, Healthy Lives (The Marmot Review). London: The Marmot Review; 2010.

Academy of Medical Sciences, Improving the health of the public by 2040: optimising the research environment for a healthier, fairer future. London: The Academy of Medical Sciences; 2016.

Rutter H, et al. The need for a complex systems model of evidence for public health. The Lancet. 2017;390(10112):2602–4.

Article   Google Scholar  

Diez Roux AV. Complex systems thinking and current impasses in health disparities research. Am J Public Health. 2011;101(9):1627–34.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Foster-Fishman PG, Nowell B, Yang H. Putting the system back into systems change: a framework for understanding and changing organizational and community systems. Am J Community Psychol. 2007;39(3–4):197–215.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

World Health Organisation (WHO). The World Health Report 2000 health systems: improving performance. Geneva: World Health Organisation; 2000.

Papanicolas I, et al. Health system performance assessment: a framework for policy analysis in Health Policy Series, No. 57. Geneva: World Heath Organisation; 2022.

Bartley M. Health Inequalities: An Introduction to Theories, Concepts and Methods. Cambridge: Polity Press; 2004.

World Health Organization and Finland Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, Health in all policies: Helsinki statement. Framework for country action. Geneva: World Health Organisation; 2014.

Marmot M, et al. Health equity in England: The Marmot Review 10 years on. London: Institute of Health Equity; 2020.

Bambra C, et al. Reducing health inequalities in priority public health conditions: using rapid review to develop proposals for evidence-based policy. J Public Health. 2010;32(4):496–505.

Public Health England, Community-centred public health. Taking a whole system approach. London: Public Health England; 2020.

Davey F, et al. Levelling up health: a practical, evidence-based framework for reducing health inequalities. Public Health in Pract. 2022;4:100322.

Public Health England (PHE). Place-based approaches to reducing health inequalities. PHE; 2021.

Ford J, et al. Transforming health systems to reduce health inequalities. Future Healthc J. 2021;8(2):e204–9.

Olivera JN, et al. Conceptualisation of health inequalities by local healthcare systems: a document analysis. Health Soc Care Community. 2022;30(6):e3977–84.

Department of Health (DoH). Health and Social Care Act 2012. 2012.

Department of Health (DoH). Health and social care act 2022. 2022.

Department of Health (DoH). Statutory guidance on joint strategic needs assessments and joint health and wellbeing strategies. London: Department of Health; 2013.

Asaria M, Doran T, Cookson R. The costs of inequality: whole-population modelling study of lifetime inpatient hospital costs in the English National health service by level of neighbourhood deprivation. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2016;70:990–6.

Castro AC, et al. Local NHS equity trends and their wider determinants: a pilot study of data on emergency admissions. 2020. https://www.york.ac.uk/media/healthsciences/documents/research/Local_NHS_Equity_Trends.pdf .

Nuffield Trust. Potentially preventable emergency admissions. 2023. Available from: https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/potentially-preventable-emergency-hospital-admissions#background .

Cookson R, Asaria M, Ali S, Ferguson B, Fleetcroft R, Goddard M, et al. Health Equity Indicators for the English NHS: a longitudinal whole-population study at the small-area level. Health Serv Deliv Res. 2016;4(26). https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr04260

Roland M, Abel G. Reducing emergency admissions: are we on the right track? BMJ. 2012;345:e6017.

Moore GF, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: medical research council guidance. BMJ. 2015;350:h1258.

Petticrew M. Public health evaluation: epistemological challenges to evidence production and use. Evid Policy. 2013;9:87–95.

Adam T. Advancing the application of systems thinking in health. Health Res Policy Syst. 2014;12(1):1–5.

Leischow SJ, et al. Systems thinking to improve the public’s health. Am J Prev Med. 2008;35:S196–203.

Paparini S, et al. Evaluating complex interventions in context: systematic, meta-narrative review of case study approaches. BMC Med Res Methodo. 2021;21(1):225.

McGill E, et al. Qualitative process evaluation from a complex systems perspective: a systematic review and framework for public health evaluators. PLoS Med. 2020;17(11):e1003368.

Paparini S, et al. Case study research for better evaluations of complex interventions: rationale and challenges. BMC Med. 2020;18(1):301.

Crowe S, et al. The case study approach. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11:100.

Ford J, et al. Reducing inequality in avoidable emergency admissions: case studies of local health care systems in England using a realist approach. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2021;27:27(1).

Stake RE. The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage; 1995.

Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government and Department for Levelling Up Housing and Communities. English indices of deprivation 2015. 2015. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/english-indices-of-deprivation-2015 .

Whitehead M. Due North: the report of the Inequiry on Health Equity for the North. 2014.

Yin RK. Case study research: design and methods. 5th ed. California: Sage Publications Inc.; 2014.

Castro Avila AC, et al. Local equity data packs for England 2009-2018. 2019. Available from: https://www.york.ac.uk/che/research/equity/monitoring/packs/ .

Yin RK. Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. 6th ed. Los Angeles: SAGE; 2018.

Patton MQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 3rd ed. London: Sage Publications; 2002.

Sowden S, et al. Interventions to reduce inequalities in avoidable hospital admissions: explanatory framework and systematic review protocol. BMJ Open. 2020;10(7):e035429.

Dalglish SL, Kalid H, McMahon SA. Document analysis in health policy research: the READ approach. Health Policy Plan. 2020;35(10):1424–31.

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.

Robson C, McCartan K. Real World Research . 4th ed. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2016.

Bowen GA. Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qual Res J. 2009;9(2):27–40.

Robson C, McCartan K. Real World Research. 4th ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2016.

Moran-Ellis J, et al. Triangulation and integration: processes, claims and implications. Qual Res. 2006;6(1):45–59.

Parbery-Clark C, et al. Coproduction of a resource sharing public views of health inequalities: an example of inclusive public and patient involvement and engagement. Health Expectations. 2023:27(1):e13860.

Stansfield J, South J, Mapplethorpe T. What are the elements of a whole system approach to community-centred public health? A qualitative study with public health leaders in England’s local authority areas. BMJ Open. 2020;10(8):e036044.

Shams L, Akbari SA, Yazdani S. Values in health policy - a concept analysis. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2016;1(5):623–30.

NHS England. Core20PLUS5 (adults) – an approach to reducing healthcare inequalities. 2021 11/03/2023]. Available from: https://www.england.nhs.uk/about/equality/equality-hub/national-healthcare-inequalities-improvement-programme/core20plus5/ .

Charles A. Integrated care systems explained: making sense of systems, places and neighbourhoods. 2022 24/09/2023]; Available from: https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/integrated-care-systems-explained .

Elwell-Sutton T, et al. Creating healthy lives: a whole-government approach to long-term investment in the nation's health. London: The Health Foundation; 2019.

Buck D, Baylis A, Dougall D. A vision for population health: towards a healthier future. London, UK: The Kings Fund; 2018.

Popay J, et al. System resilience and neighbourhood action on social determinants of health inequalities: an english case study. Perspect Public Health. 2022;142(4):213–23.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   CAS   Google Scholar  

Asaria M, et al. How a universal health system reduces inequalities: lessons from England. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2016;70(7):637–43.

Daniel KD. Introduction to systems thinking. Pegasus Communications, Inc; 1999.

Jessiman PE, et al. A systems map of determinants of child health inequalities in England at the local level. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(2):e0245577.

Sleeman KE, et al. Is end-of-life a priority for policymakers? Qualitative documentary analysis of health care strategies. Palliat Med. 2018;32(9):1464–84.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our Understanding Factors that explain Avoidable hospital admission Inequalities - Research study (UNFAIR) PPI contributors, for their involvement in the project particularly in the identification of the key criteria for the sampling frame. Thanks to the research advisory team as well.

Informed consent statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Submission declaration and verification

The manuscript is not currently under consideration or published in another journal. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

This research was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), grant number (ref CA-CL-2018-04-ST2-010). The funding body was not involved in the study design, collection of data, inter-pretation, write-up, or submission for publication. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care or Newcastle University.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Medical Sciences, Public Health Registrar, Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK

Charlotte Parbery-Clark

Post-Doctoral Research Associate, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK

Lorraine McSweeney

Senior Research Methodologist & Public Involvement Lead, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK

Joanne Lally

Senior Clinical Lecturer &, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Honorary Consultant in Public Health, Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK

Sarah Sowden

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization - J.L. and S.S.; methodology - C.P.-C., J.L. & S.S.; formal analysis - C. P.-C. & L.M.; investigation- C. P.-C. & L.M., resources, writing of draft manuscript - C.P.-C.; review and editing manuscript L.M., J.L., & S.S.; visualization including figures and tables - C.P.-C.; supervision - J.L. & S.S.; project administration - L.M. & S.S.; funding acquisition - S.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Charlotte Parbery-Clark or Sarah Sowden .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board (or Ethics Committee) of Newcastle University (protocol code 13633/2020 on the 12 th of July 2021).

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary material 1., supplementary material 2., rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Parbery-Clark, C., McSweeney, L., Lally, J. et al. How can health systems approach reducing health inequalities? An in-depth qualitative case study in the UK. BMC Public Health 24 , 2168 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-19531-5

Download citation

Received : 20 October 2023

Accepted : 18 July 2024

Published : 10 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-19531-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Health inequalities
• Complex whole systems approach
• In-depth qualitative case study

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

• General enquiries: [email protected]

• Open access
• Published: 27 June 2011

The case study approach

• Sarah Crowe 1 ,
• Kathrin Cresswell 2 ,
• Ann Robertson 2 ,
• Guro Huby 3 ,
• Anthony Avery 1 &
• Aziz Sheikh 2  

BMC Medical Research Methodology volume  11 , Article number:  100 ( 2011 ) Cite this article

794k Accesses

1098 Citations

42 Altmetric

Metrics details

The case study approach allows in-depth, multi-faceted explorations of complex issues in their real-life settings. The value of the case study approach is well recognised in the fields of business, law and policy, but somewhat less so in health services research. Based on our experiences of conducting several health-related case studies, we reflect on the different types of case study design, the specific research questions this approach can help answer, the data sources that tend to be used, and the particular advantages and disadvantages of employing this methodological approach. The paper concludes with key pointers to aid those designing and appraising proposals for conducting case study research, and a checklist to help readers assess the quality of case study reports.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The case study approach is particularly useful to employ when there is a need to obtain an in-depth appreciation of an issue, event or phenomenon of interest, in its natural real-life context. Our aim in writing this piece is to provide insights into when to consider employing this approach and an overview of key methodological considerations in relation to the design, planning, analysis, interpretation and reporting of case studies.

The illustrative 'grand round', 'case report' and 'case series' have a long tradition in clinical practice and research. Presenting detailed critiques, typically of one or more patients, aims to provide insights into aspects of the clinical case and, in doing so, illustrate broader lessons that may be learnt. In research, the conceptually-related case study approach can be used, for example, to describe in detail a patient's episode of care, explore professional attitudes to and experiences of a new policy initiative or service development or more generally to 'investigate contemporary phenomena within its real-life context' [ 1 ]. Based on our experiences of conducting a range of case studies, we reflect on when to consider using this approach, discuss the key steps involved and illustrate, with examples, some of the practical challenges of attaining an in-depth understanding of a 'case' as an integrated whole. In keeping with previously published work, we acknowledge the importance of theory to underpin the design, selection, conduct and interpretation of case studies[ 2 ]. In so doing, we make passing reference to the different epistemological approaches used in case study research by key theoreticians and methodologists in this field of enquiry.

This paper is structured around the following main questions: What is a case study? What are case studies used for? How are case studies conducted? What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided? We draw in particular on four of our own recently published examples of case studies (see Tables 1 , 2 , 3 and 4 ) and those of others to illustrate our discussion[ 3 – 7 ].

What is a case study?

A case study is a research approach that is used to generate an in-depth, multi-faceted understanding of a complex issue in its real-life context. It is an established research design that is used extensively in a wide variety of disciplines, particularly in the social sciences. A case study can be defined in a variety of ways (Table 5 ), the central tenet being the need to explore an event or phenomenon in depth and in its natural context. It is for this reason sometimes referred to as a "naturalistic" design; this is in contrast to an "experimental" design (such as a randomised controlled trial) in which the investigator seeks to exert control over and manipulate the variable(s) of interest.

Stake's work has been particularly influential in defining the case study approach to scientific enquiry. He has helpfully characterised three main types of case study: intrinsic , instrumental and collective [ 8 ]. An intrinsic case study is typically undertaken to learn about a unique phenomenon. The researcher should define the uniqueness of the phenomenon, which distinguishes it from all others. In contrast, the instrumental case study uses a particular case (some of which may be better than others) to gain a broader appreciation of an issue or phenomenon. The collective case study involves studying multiple cases simultaneously or sequentially in an attempt to generate a still broader appreciation of a particular issue.

These are however not necessarily mutually exclusive categories. In the first of our examples (Table 1 ), we undertook an intrinsic case study to investigate the issue of recruitment of minority ethnic people into the specific context of asthma research studies, but it developed into a instrumental case study through seeking to understand the issue of recruitment of these marginalised populations more generally, generating a number of the findings that are potentially transferable to other disease contexts[ 3 ]. In contrast, the other three examples (see Tables 2 , 3 and 4 ) employed collective case study designs to study the introduction of workforce reconfiguration in primary care, the implementation of electronic health records into hospitals, and to understand the ways in which healthcare students learn about patient safety considerations[ 4 – 6 ]. Although our study focusing on the introduction of General Practitioners with Specialist Interests (Table 2 ) was explicitly collective in design (four contrasting primary care organisations were studied), is was also instrumental in that this particular professional group was studied as an exemplar of the more general phenomenon of workforce redesign[ 4 ].

What are case studies used for?

According to Yin, case studies can be used to explain, describe or explore events or phenomena in the everyday contexts in which they occur[ 1 ]. These can, for example, help to understand and explain causal links and pathways resulting from a new policy initiative or service development (see Tables 2 and 3 , for example)[ 1 ]. In contrast to experimental designs, which seek to test a specific hypothesis through deliberately manipulating the environment (like, for example, in a randomised controlled trial giving a new drug to randomly selected individuals and then comparing outcomes with controls),[ 9 ] the case study approach lends itself well to capturing information on more explanatory ' how ', 'what' and ' why ' questions, such as ' how is the intervention being implemented and received on the ground?'. The case study approach can offer additional insights into what gaps exist in its delivery or why one implementation strategy might be chosen over another. This in turn can help develop or refine theory, as shown in our study of the teaching of patient safety in undergraduate curricula (Table 4 )[ 6 , 10 ]. Key questions to consider when selecting the most appropriate study design are whether it is desirable or indeed possible to undertake a formal experimental investigation in which individuals and/or organisations are allocated to an intervention or control arm? Or whether the wish is to obtain a more naturalistic understanding of an issue? The former is ideally studied using a controlled experimental design, whereas the latter is more appropriately studied using a case study design.

Case studies may be approached in different ways depending on the epistemological standpoint of the researcher, that is, whether they take a critical (questioning one's own and others' assumptions), interpretivist (trying to understand individual and shared social meanings) or positivist approach (orientating towards the criteria of natural sciences, such as focusing on generalisability considerations) (Table 6 ). Whilst such a schema can be conceptually helpful, it may be appropriate to draw on more than one approach in any case study, particularly in the context of conducting health services research. Doolin has, for example, noted that in the context of undertaking interpretative case studies, researchers can usefully draw on a critical, reflective perspective which seeks to take into account the wider social and political environment that has shaped the case[ 11 ].

How are case studies conducted?

Here, we focus on the main stages of research activity when planning and undertaking a case study; the crucial stages are: defining the case; selecting the case(s); collecting and analysing the data; interpreting data; and reporting the findings.

Defining the case

Carefully formulated research question(s), informed by the existing literature and a prior appreciation of the theoretical issues and setting(s), are all important in appropriately and succinctly defining the case[ 8 , 12 ]. Crucially, each case should have a pre-defined boundary which clarifies the nature and time period covered by the case study (i.e. its scope, beginning and end), the relevant social group, organisation or geographical area of interest to the investigator, the types of evidence to be collected, and the priorities for data collection and analysis (see Table 7 )[ 1 ]. A theory driven approach to defining the case may help generate knowledge that is potentially transferable to a range of clinical contexts and behaviours; using theory is also likely to result in a more informed appreciation of, for example, how and why interventions have succeeded or failed[ 13 ].

For example, in our evaluation of the introduction of electronic health records in English hospitals (Table 3 ), we defined our cases as the NHS Trusts that were receiving the new technology[ 5 ]. Our focus was on how the technology was being implemented. However, if the primary research interest had been on the social and organisational dimensions of implementation, we might have defined our case differently as a grouping of healthcare professionals (e.g. doctors and/or nurses). The precise beginning and end of the case may however prove difficult to define. Pursuing this same example, when does the process of implementation and adoption of an electronic health record system really begin or end? Such judgements will inevitably be influenced by a range of factors, including the research question, theory of interest, the scope and richness of the gathered data and the resources available to the research team.

Selecting the case(s)

The decision on how to select the case(s) to study is a very important one that merits some reflection. In an intrinsic case study, the case is selected on its own merits[ 8 ]. The case is selected not because it is representative of other cases, but because of its uniqueness, which is of genuine interest to the researchers. This was, for example, the case in our study of the recruitment of minority ethnic participants into asthma research (Table 1 ) as our earlier work had demonstrated the marginalisation of minority ethnic people with asthma, despite evidence of disproportionate asthma morbidity[ 14 , 15 ]. In another example of an intrinsic case study, Hellstrom et al.[ 16 ] studied an elderly married couple living with dementia to explore how dementia had impacted on their understanding of home, their everyday life and their relationships.

For an instrumental case study, selecting a "typical" case can work well[ 8 ]. In contrast to the intrinsic case study, the particular case which is chosen is of less importance than selecting a case that allows the researcher to investigate an issue or phenomenon. For example, in order to gain an understanding of doctors' responses to health policy initiatives, Som undertook an instrumental case study interviewing clinicians who had a range of responsibilities for clinical governance in one NHS acute hospital trust[ 17 ]. Sampling a "deviant" or "atypical" case may however prove even more informative, potentially enabling the researcher to identify causal processes, generate hypotheses and develop theory.

In collective or multiple case studies, a number of cases are carefully selected. This offers the advantage of allowing comparisons to be made across several cases and/or replication. Choosing a "typical" case may enable the findings to be generalised to theory (i.e. analytical generalisation) or to test theory by replicating the findings in a second or even a third case (i.e. replication logic)[ 1 ]. Yin suggests two or three literal replications (i.e. predicting similar results) if the theory is straightforward and five or more if the theory is more subtle. However, critics might argue that selecting 'cases' in this way is insufficiently reflexive and ill-suited to the complexities of contemporary healthcare organisations.

The selected case study site(s) should allow the research team access to the group of individuals, the organisation, the processes or whatever else constitutes the chosen unit of analysis for the study. Access is therefore a central consideration; the researcher needs to come to know the case study site(s) well and to work cooperatively with them. Selected cases need to be not only interesting but also hospitable to the inquiry [ 8 ] if they are to be informative and answer the research question(s). Case study sites may also be pre-selected for the researcher, with decisions being influenced by key stakeholders. For example, our selection of case study sites in the evaluation of the implementation and adoption of electronic health record systems (see Table 3 ) was heavily influenced by NHS Connecting for Health, the government agency that was responsible for overseeing the National Programme for Information Technology (NPfIT)[ 5 ]. This prominent stakeholder had already selected the NHS sites (through a competitive bidding process) to be early adopters of the electronic health record systems and had negotiated contracts that detailed the deployment timelines.

It is also important to consider in advance the likely burden and risks associated with participation for those who (or the site(s) which) comprise the case study. Of particular importance is the obligation for the researcher to think through the ethical implications of the study (e.g. the risk of inadvertently breaching anonymity or confidentiality) and to ensure that potential participants/participating sites are provided with sufficient information to make an informed choice about joining the study. The outcome of providing this information might be that the emotive burden associated with participation, or the organisational disruption associated with supporting the fieldwork, is considered so high that the individuals or sites decide against participation.

In our example of evaluating implementations of electronic health record systems, given the restricted number of early adopter sites available to us, we sought purposively to select a diverse range of implementation cases among those that were available[ 5 ]. We chose a mixture of teaching, non-teaching and Foundation Trust hospitals, and examples of each of the three electronic health record systems procured centrally by the NPfIT. At one recruited site, it quickly became apparent that access was problematic because of competing demands on that organisation. Recognising the importance of full access and co-operative working for generating rich data, the research team decided not to pursue work at that site and instead to focus on other recruited sites.

Collecting the data

In order to develop a thorough understanding of the case, the case study approach usually involves the collection of multiple sources of evidence, using a range of quantitative (e.g. questionnaires, audits and analysis of routinely collected healthcare data) and more commonly qualitative techniques (e.g. interviews, focus groups and observations). The use of multiple sources of data (data triangulation) has been advocated as a way of increasing the internal validity of a study (i.e. the extent to which the method is appropriate to answer the research question)[ 8 , 18 – 21 ]. An underlying assumption is that data collected in different ways should lead to similar conclusions, and approaching the same issue from different angles can help develop a holistic picture of the phenomenon (Table 2 )[ 4 ].

Brazier and colleagues used a mixed-methods case study approach to investigate the impact of a cancer care programme[ 22 ]. Here, quantitative measures were collected with questionnaires before, and five months after, the start of the intervention which did not yield any statistically significant results. Qualitative interviews with patients however helped provide an insight into potentially beneficial process-related aspects of the programme, such as greater, perceived patient involvement in care. The authors reported how this case study approach provided a number of contextual factors likely to influence the effectiveness of the intervention and which were not likely to have been obtained from quantitative methods alone.

In collective or multiple case studies, data collection needs to be flexible enough to allow a detailed description of each individual case to be developed (e.g. the nature of different cancer care programmes), before considering the emerging similarities and differences in cross-case comparisons (e.g. to explore why one programme is more effective than another). It is important that data sources from different cases are, where possible, broadly comparable for this purpose even though they may vary in nature and depth.

Analysing, interpreting and reporting case studies

Making sense and offering a coherent interpretation of the typically disparate sources of data (whether qualitative alone or together with quantitative) is far from straightforward. Repeated reviewing and sorting of the voluminous and detail-rich data are integral to the process of analysis. In collective case studies, it is helpful to analyse data relating to the individual component cases first, before making comparisons across cases. Attention needs to be paid to variations within each case and, where relevant, the relationship between different causes, effects and outcomes[ 23 ]. Data will need to be organised and coded to allow the key issues, both derived from the literature and emerging from the dataset, to be easily retrieved at a later stage. An initial coding frame can help capture these issues and can be applied systematically to the whole dataset with the aid of a qualitative data analysis software package.

The Framework approach is a practical approach, comprising of five stages (familiarisation; identifying a thematic framework; indexing; charting; mapping and interpretation) , to managing and analysing large datasets particularly if time is limited, as was the case in our study of recruitment of South Asians into asthma research (Table 1 )[ 3 , 24 ]. Theoretical frameworks may also play an important role in integrating different sources of data and examining emerging themes. For example, we drew on a socio-technical framework to help explain the connections between different elements - technology; people; and the organisational settings within which they worked - in our study of the introduction of electronic health record systems (Table 3 )[ 5 ]. Our study of patient safety in undergraduate curricula drew on an evaluation-based approach to design and analysis, which emphasised the importance of the academic, organisational and practice contexts through which students learn (Table 4 )[ 6 ].

Case study findings can have implications both for theory development and theory testing. They may establish, strengthen or weaken historical explanations of a case and, in certain circumstances, allow theoretical (as opposed to statistical) generalisation beyond the particular cases studied[ 12 ]. These theoretical lenses should not, however, constitute a strait-jacket and the cases should not be "forced to fit" the particular theoretical framework that is being employed.

When reporting findings, it is important to provide the reader with enough contextual information to understand the processes that were followed and how the conclusions were reached. In a collective case study, researchers may choose to present the findings from individual cases separately before amalgamating across cases. Care must be taken to ensure the anonymity of both case sites and individual participants (if agreed in advance) by allocating appropriate codes or withholding descriptors. In the example given in Table 3 , we decided against providing detailed information on the NHS sites and individual participants in order to avoid the risk of inadvertent disclosure of identities[ 5 , 25 ].

What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided?

The case study approach is, as with all research, not without its limitations. When investigating the formal and informal ways undergraduate students learn about patient safety (Table 4 ), for example, we rapidly accumulated a large quantity of data. The volume of data, together with the time restrictions in place, impacted on the depth of analysis that was possible within the available resources. This highlights a more general point of the importance of avoiding the temptation to collect as much data as possible; adequate time also needs to be set aside for data analysis and interpretation of what are often highly complex datasets.

Case study research has sometimes been criticised for lacking scientific rigour and providing little basis for generalisation (i.e. producing findings that may be transferable to other settings)[ 1 ]. There are several ways to address these concerns, including: the use of theoretical sampling (i.e. drawing on a particular conceptual framework); respondent validation (i.e. participants checking emerging findings and the researcher's interpretation, and providing an opinion as to whether they feel these are accurate); and transparency throughout the research process (see Table 8 )[ 8 , 18 – 21 , 23 , 26 ]. Transparency can be achieved by describing in detail the steps involved in case selection, data collection, the reasons for the particular methods chosen, and the researcher's background and level of involvement (i.e. being explicit about how the researcher has influenced data collection and interpretation). Seeking potential, alternative explanations, and being explicit about how interpretations and conclusions were reached, help readers to judge the trustworthiness of the case study report. Stake provides a critique checklist for a case study report (Table 9 )[ 8 ].

Conclusions

The case study approach allows, amongst other things, critical events, interventions, policy developments and programme-based service reforms to be studied in detail in a real-life context. It should therefore be considered when an experimental design is either inappropriate to answer the research questions posed or impossible to undertake. Considering the frequency with which implementations of innovations are now taking place in healthcare settings and how well the case study approach lends itself to in-depth, complex health service research, we believe this approach should be more widely considered by researchers. Though inherently challenging, the research case study can, if carefully conceptualised and thoughtfully undertaken and reported, yield powerful insights into many important aspects of health and healthcare delivery.

Yin RK: Case study research, design and method. 2009, London: Sage Publications Ltd., 4

Google Scholar  

Keen J, Packwood T: Qualitative research; case study evaluation. BMJ. 1995, 311: 444-446.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Sheikh A, Halani L, Bhopal R, Netuveli G, Partridge M, Car J, et al: Facilitating the Recruitment of Minority Ethnic People into Research: Qualitative Case Study of South Asians and Asthma. PLoS Med. 2009, 6 (10): 1-11.

Article   Google Scholar  

Pinnock H, Huby G, Powell A, Kielmann T, Price D, Williams S, et al: The process of planning, development and implementation of a General Practitioner with a Special Interest service in Primary Care Organisations in England and Wales: a comparative prospective case study. Report for the National Co-ordinating Centre for NHS Service Delivery and Organisation R&D (NCCSDO). 2008, [ http://www.sdo.nihr.ac.uk/files/project/99-final-report.pdf ]

Robertson A, Cresswell K, Takian A, Petrakaki D, Crowe S, Cornford T, et al: Prospective evaluation of the implementation and adoption of NHS Connecting for Health's national electronic health record in secondary care in England: interim findings. BMJ. 2010, 41: c4564-

Pearson P, Steven A, Howe A, Sheikh A, Ashcroft D, Smith P, the Patient Safety Education Study Group: Learning about patient safety: organisational context and culture in the education of healthcare professionals. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2010, 15: 4-10. 10.1258/jhsrp.2009.009052.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

van Harten WH, Casparie TF, Fisscher OA: The evaluation of the introduction of a quality management system: a process-oriented case study in a large rehabilitation hospital. Health Policy. 2002, 60 (1): 17-37. 10.1016/S0168-8510(01)00187-7.

Stake RE: The art of case study research. 1995, London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Sheikh A, Smeeth L, Ashcroft R: Randomised controlled trials in primary care: scope and application. Br J Gen Pract. 2002, 52 (482): 746-51.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

King G, Keohane R, Verba S: Designing Social Inquiry. 1996, Princeton: Princeton University Press

Doolin B: Information technology as disciplinary technology: being critical in interpretative research on information systems. Journal of Information Technology. 1998, 13: 301-311. 10.1057/jit.1998.8.

George AL, Bennett A: Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. 2005, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Eccles M, the Improved Clinical Effectiveness through Behavioural Research Group (ICEBeRG): Designing theoretically-informed implementation interventions. Implementation Science. 2006, 1: 1-8. 10.1186/1748-5908-1-1.

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Netuveli G, Hurwitz B, Levy M, Fletcher M, Barnes G, Durham SR, Sheikh A: Ethnic variations in UK asthma frequency, morbidity, and health-service use: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2005, 365 (9456): 312-7.

Sheikh A, Panesar SS, Lasserson T, Netuveli G: Recruitment of ethnic minorities to asthma studies. Thorax. 2004, 59 (7): 634-

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hellström I, Nolan M, Lundh U: 'We do things together': A case study of 'couplehood' in dementia. Dementia. 2005, 4: 7-22. 10.1177/1471301205049188.

Som CV: Nothing seems to have changed, nothing seems to be changing and perhaps nothing will change in the NHS: doctors' response to clinical governance. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 2005, 18: 463-477. 10.1108/09513550510608903.

Lincoln Y, Guba E: Naturalistic inquiry. 1985, Newbury Park: Sage Publications

Barbour RS: Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog?. BMJ. 2001, 322: 1115-1117. 10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115.

Mays N, Pope C: Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ. 2000, 320: 50-52. 10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50.

Mason J: Qualitative researching. 2002, London: Sage

Brazier A, Cooke K, Moravan V: Using Mixed Methods for Evaluating an Integrative Approach to Cancer Care: A Case Study. Integr Cancer Ther. 2008, 7: 5-17. 10.1177/1534735407313395.

Miles MB, Huberman M: Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. 1994, CA: Sage Publications Inc., 2

Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays N: Analysing qualitative data. Qualitative research in health care. BMJ. 2000, 320: 114-116. 10.1136/bmj.320.7227.114.

Cresswell KM, Worth A, Sheikh A: Actor-Network Theory and its role in understanding the implementation of information technology developments in healthcare. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010, 10 (1): 67-10.1186/1472-6947-10-67.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Malterud K: Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet. 2001, 358: 483-488. 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05627-6.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Yin R: Case study research: design and methods. 1994, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing, 2

Yin R: Enhancing the quality of case studies in health services research. Health Serv Res. 1999, 34: 1209-1224.

Green J, Thorogood N: Qualitative methods for health research. 2009, Los Angeles: Sage, 2

Howcroft D, Trauth E: Handbook of Critical Information Systems Research, Theory and Application. 2005, Cheltenham, UK: Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar

Book   Google Scholar  

Blakie N: Approaches to Social Enquiry. 1993, Cambridge: Polity Press

Doolin B: Power and resistance in the implementation of a medical management information system. Info Systems J. 2004, 14: 343-362. 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2004.00176.x.

Bloomfield BP, Best A: Management consultants: systems development, power and the translation of problems. Sociological Review. 1992, 40: 533-560.

Shanks G, Parr A: Positivist, single case study research in information systems: A critical analysis. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems. 2003, Naples

Pre-publication history

The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/11/100/prepub

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the participants and colleagues who contributed to the individual case studies that we have drawn on. This work received no direct funding, but it has been informed by projects funded by Asthma UK, the NHS Service Delivery Organisation, NHS Connecting for Health Evaluation Programme, and Patient Safety Research Portfolio. We would also like to thank the expert reviewers for their insightful and constructive feedback. Our thanks are also due to Dr. Allison Worth who commented on an earlier draft of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Division of Primary Care, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

Sarah Crowe & Anthony Avery

Centre for Population Health Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

Kathrin Cresswell, Ann Robertson & Aziz Sheikh

School of Health in Social Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah Crowe .

Additional information

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

AS conceived this article. SC, KC and AR wrote this paper with GH, AA and AS all commenting on various drafts. SC and AS are guarantors.

Rights and permissions

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A. et al. The case study approach. BMC Med Res Methodol 11 , 100 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Download citation

Received : 29 November 2010

Accepted : 27 June 2011

Published : 27 June 2011

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Case Study Approach
• Electronic Health Record System
• Case Study Design
• Case Study Site
• Case Study Report

BMC Medical Research Methodology

ISSN: 1471-2288

• General enquiries: [email protected]

• Open access
• Published: 12 August 2024

Enhancing mutation detection in multiple myeloma with an error-corrected ultra-sensitive NGS assay without plasma cell enrichment

• Jin Ju Kim 1 ,
• Soo-Jeong Kim 2 ,
• Seoyoung Lim 3 ,
• Seung-Tae Lee 4 , 5 ,
• Jong Rak Choi 4 , 5 ,
• Saeam Shin 4 &
• Doh Yu Hwang 6  

Cancer Cell International volume  24 , Article number:  282 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

27 Accesses

8 Altmetric

Metrics details

Risk stratification in multiple myeloma (MM) patients is crucial, and molecular genetic studies play a significant role in achieving this objective. Enrichment of plasma cells for next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis has been employed to enhance detection sensitivity. However, these methods often come with limitations, such as high costs and low throughput. In this study, we explore the use of an error-corrected ultrasensitive NGS assay called positional indexing sequencing (PiSeq-MM). This assay can detect somatic mutations in MM patients without relying on plasma cell enrichment.

Diagnostic bone marrow aspirates (BMAs) and blood samples from 14 MM patients were used for exploratory and validation sets.

PiSeq-MM successfully detected somatic mutations in all BMAs, outperforming conventional NGS using plasma cells. It also identified 38 low-frequency mutations that were missed by conventional NGS, enhancing detection sensitivity below the 5% analytical threshold. When tested in an actual clinical environment, plasma cell enrichment failed in most BMAs (14/16), but the PiSeq-MM enabled mutation detection in all BMAs. There was concordance between PiSeq-MM using BMAs and ctDNA analysis in paired blood samples.

This research provides valuable insights into the genetic landscape of MM and highlights the advantages of error-corrected NGS for detecting low-frequency mutations. Although the current standard method for mutation analysis is plasma cell-enriched BMAs, total BMA or ctDNA testing with error correction is a viable alternative when plasma cell enrichment is not feasible.

Introduction

Multiple myeloma (MM), is a plasma cell neoplasm that predominantly affects elderly individuals and accounts for 10% of hematologic neoplasms [ 1 ]. The initial choice of therapy for patients with plasma cell neoplasms is based on clinical criteria; however, identifying cytogenetic abnormalities in plasma cells is valuable for risk stratification [ 2 ]. Several somatic driver mutations, such as KRAS , NRAS , and TP53 , are related to MM [ 3 , 4 ]. Therefore, many molecular genetic studies, including chromosomal analysis, interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and next-generation sequencing (NGS), are performed on MM patients.

Bone marrow aspirates (BMAs) from MM patients are mixture of normal hematopoietic cells and malignant plasma cells. The composition fraction of plasma cells varies from 10% to > 80%, so it is crucial to detect the genetic abnormality of malignant plasma cells, which can be diluted by normal cells. To increase the analytical sensitivity of FISH or NGS to detect molecular abnormalities, plasma cell enrichment techniques such as fluorescence immunophenotyping and interphase cytogenetics as a tool for the investigation of neoplasms (FICTION), fluorescence-activated cell sorter (FACS), or magnetic-activated cell sorting (MACS) are used in laboratories [ 5 , 6 , 7 ]. However, the plasma cell enrichment process has some disadvantages, such as the associated cost (for equipment, reagents, and labor), time (particularly for the cell sorting step), technician training, and the need for large amounts of fresh samples [ 7 ]. Due to these drawbacks, the application of enrichment techniques in routine clinical practice is limited.

There are frequent errors in NGS during processing due to DNA damage and sequencing steps. These errors create barriers to sensitive mutation detection. Therefore, several error correction strategies have recently emerged in the clinical NGS field to detect low-allele frequency mutations for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) or measurable residual disease (MRD) analysis [ 8 , 9 ]. Error correction strategies, such as molecular barcoding or in silico error suppression, can increase the detection capability of NGS to below 1% of variant allele frequencies (VAF) [ 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ]. We developed a positional indexing sequencing (PiSeq) analysis method that tags the beginning and end parts of DNA molecules. By recognizing sequencing reads with the same start and end points as a group, the method is able to distinguish and correct errors in sequencing [ 14 , 15 ].

This study evaluated whether mutation detection sensitivity could be increased in MM patients using our error-corrected ultrasensitive NGS assay (PiSeq-MM) without plasma cell enrichment. We hypothesized that an error-corrected algorithm would enable us to detect somatic mutations in BMA without the need for plasma cell enrichment, similar to blood sample analysis. Using total cells for NGS can streamline the clinical workflow by eliminating the need for cell enrichment, and thereby reduce time and effort. Additionally, we conducted NGS on matched blood samples to investigate whether ctDNA analysis can infer somatic mutations in malignant plasma cells. An overview of this study is depicted in Fig.  1 .

Overview of the study design for validation of an ultrasensitive NGS assay An illustration of the study design

Materials and methods

Study samples.

Diagnostic BMAs and matching blood samples from 14 patients who visited the Yongin Severance Hospital between March 2020 and March 2023 were included. Six patients were included in the exploratory cohort and eight in the validation cohort. Patients in the exploratory cohort had NGS results from fresh BMAs with a plasma cell enrichment step performed using our institute diagnostic panels (conventional NGS using PC). The panel included 742 target genes with therapeutic, prognostic, and diagnostic properties in a variety of cancers, including lymphomas and myeloma (Supplementary Table S1 ). The plasma cell enrichment process was successful in five out of six patients’ samples and the samples are proceeded to NGS analysis. In the sample in which the enrichment step failed (P3), the total DNA from the BMA was used for NGS analysis. General NGS strategies were applied without error-corrected bioinformatics algorithms with a mean sequencing depth of 522×. In this case, an analytical sensitivity of 5% was assumed.

The patients were pathologically diagnosed with MM according to the 2014 International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria [ 16 ]. The following clinical data were collected from the electronic medical records: age, sex, test results (including cytogenetics), bone marrow study, and clonality test results. The baseline clinical features of the 14 MM patients whose clinical samples were used in this validation are summarized in Table  1 .

Sample preparation

Fresh BMAs from exploratory cohorts collected in ethylene diamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) tubes were used for conventional NGS using PC. Plasma cell enrichment was performed as follows: buffy coats were isolated from BMAs and diluted with erythrocyte lysis buffer. The mix was incubated at room temperature for 20 min, and then centrifuged at 2100 rpm for 5 min. The cell pellet was resuspended in phosphate-buffered saline. After three washing cycles, the concentration was adjusted to 1 × 10⁶ − 4 × 10⁷ cells/mL. Antibody staining was performed using anti-CD38-FITC and anti-CD138-PE (Beckman Coulter, CA, USA). Then, plasma cell sorting was conducted on a BD FACS Melody™ (BD Biosciences, San Jose, CA, USA) or S3e™ Cell Sorter (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA, USA).

For ctDNA analysis, blood samples were obtained from patients at the time of diagnosis. Twenty milliliters of whole blood in a DxTube (Dxome, Seoul, Republic of Korea) was used. The samples were processed within 4 h at a constant temperature of 4 °C. Plasma was isolated by double centrifugation (1900 × g for 15 min). Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were transferred to fresh tubes in 1 ml aliquots. Supernatants were also separately aliquoted in fresh tubes. Frozen aliquots of plasma were stored at -80 °C until ctDNA extraction. The ctDNA was extracted from 4 mL of plasma using magnetic circulating DNA Maxi Reagent (Dxome) according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

EDTA-BMAs from all 14 patients were also double centrifuged. Buffy coats were collected and then frozen in aliquots at -80 °C. Genomic DNA (gDNA) from PBMCs and BMA buffy coats was extracted using the QIAsymphony DNA Mini Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) according to the manufacturer’s guidelines. Library preparation was performed using 2.5–30 ng of ctDNA and 110–200 ng of sheared gDNA using the DxSeq Library prep reagent (Dxome). For each sample, PBMCs were sequenced as germline-matched controls using identical panel and library kits targeting an average depth of > 2,500×. The pooled libraries were paired-end sequenced (2 × 150 bp) on the NovaSeq 6000 System (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA). Bioinformatics pipelines used for the analysis of NGS data consist of multiple steps, such as demultiplexing, read alignment, deduplication, base calibration and variant calling. An additional variant calling step with our error-correction pipeline, the PiSeq algorithm (Dxome), was used to differentiate low-frequency mutations from amplification artifacts and sequencing errors by calculating the genomic positions of mapped reads [ 14 ]. Variants were annotated using DxSeq software (Dxome) with public database information. Identified variants were visually confirmed with Integrative Genome Viewer (Broad Institute, Cambridge, MA, USA). Genic copy number variants (CNVs) and CNVs at the whole genome level were analyzed using DxSeq software (Dxome, Sungnam, South Korea). Germline variants were removed using parallel NGS data from PBMC-derived DNA.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analyses were performed using MedCalc version 18.2.1 (MedCalc Software; Mariakerke, Belgium). For continuous data, the Shapiro–Wilk test was used to detect departures from normality. Variables were compared using the Mann–Whitney U test. The Passing–Bablock regression was used to compare the VAF between samples. The Spearman rank correlation coefficient (r) was calculated. Statistical significance was defined as p  < 0.05.

Ultra-high depth ngs sequencing with the piseq algorithm: enhancing mutation detection in MM without plasma cell enrichment

Our primary objective was to determine whether ultrahigh-depth NGS sequencing with the Piseq algorithm could effectively detect meaningful variants in MM without the need for plasma cell enrichment (PiSeq-MM). To achieve this, we conducted NGS using BMA samples without performing the enrichment step. Our study cohort consisted of six MM patients who had previously undergone conventional NGS using PC.

For the analysis, we used the same targeted NGS panel of 742 genes. The median sequencing depth of PiSeq-MM using the six BMAs was 14,427×. In the comparison, mutations were detected in five out of six conventional NGS using PCs (83.3%), while all six PiSeq-MM using BMAs had detectable mutations (Supplemental Table S2 ).

The total number of somatic mutations detected in conventional NGS using PCs ranged from 0 to 7 mutations per patient, amounting to 23 mutations in total. In contrast, PiSeq-MM using BMAs identified 47 somatic mutations, with a range of 2 to 16 mutations per patient. Notably, 39.1% ( n  = 9/23) of the mutations detected in PiSeq-MM using BMAs also showed a median VAF of 46.8% in the plasma cell-enriched samples (Fig.  2 A and B). Mutations that were not discovered in PiSeq-MM using BMAs had a low representation in conventional NGS using PCs, with a median VAF of 28.8% (Fig.  2 B). None of the 14 non-overlapping mutations are known to impact the clinical diagnostic outcome.

Concordance analysis of SNV/indel mutations detected in samples from the exploratory cohort. (A) Venn diagram showing the number of mutations detected in PiSeq-MM using BMA and conventional NGS using PC. (B) VAF distribution of mutations identified by conventional NGS using PC specific, shared by both conventional NGS using PC and PiSeq-MM using BMA, and by PiSeq-MM using BMA specific. (C) Venn diagram of mutations shared by PiSeq-MM using BMA, conventional NGS using PC and ctPiSeq-MM. Only targeted genes shared between each NGS panels were considered. (D) Correlation of VAFs between the two NGS panels. * p  < 0.05 †Targeted genes shared by both NGS panels, 104 out of 742 genes are considered

PiSeq-MM using BMAs uncovered an additional 38 somatic mutations that were not detectable in conventional NGS using PCs. Among these, there were 7 variants affecting KRAS [ 17 , 18 ] and 6 variants affecting NRAS [ 18 ], both of which are known driver mutations in MM (Supplemental Table S2 ). The VAFs of these 38 somatic mutations ranged from 0.1 to 10.3% with a median VAF of 0.5% (Fig.  2 B), which is near or below the analytical sensitivity of general NGS, 5%.

Importantly, there was no correlation between the VAF of conventional NGS using PCs and PiSeq-MM using BMA ( r  = 0.367, p  = 0.3317). This finding indicates that the mutation detection with PiSeq-MM using BMA is not solely dependent on the VAF observed in plasma cell-enriched samples.

Exploring the potential of ctDNA analysis in MM: concordance and mutational landscape compared to conventional NGS

To investigate the potential of ctDNA in MM, we developed a targeted NGS panel comprising a smaller number of genes (112 genes) than were included in the comprehensive panel (742 genes) (Supplementary Table S1 ). The selected 112 genes were chosen based on the following criteria: (a) commonly found in myeloma patients tested with our institute’s conventional NGS panel (742 genes), (b) involved in important signaling pathways in multiple myeloma e.g. the MAPK, MYC, DNA repair and NFKB pathways, and (c) treatment targets or candidates for drug resistance in multiple myeloma (e.g. IKZF3 , BCL2 , PTEN and NFKB2 ) [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 ]. Additionally, to ensure that the ctDNA NGS panel can be used for patients with both myeloma and lymphoma, genes found in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (e.g., CD7 ) were also included. This selection of these genes was meticulously curated based on an extensive review of relevant literature, databases, and guidelines by a team of expert medical oncologists.

We conducted ctDNA analysis using the targeted NGS panel comprising 112 genes and employed the Piseq algorithm (ctPiSeq-MM) on matched blood samples from six patients in an exploratory cohort. The median sequencing depth of ctPiSeq-MM was 68,048×. A total of 19 somatic mutations were detected across the six ctPiSeq-MM samples, ranging from 0 to 6 mutations per patient.

Considering only the mutations present in the genes shared between the two NGS panels (Supplementary Table S1 ), we found that all mutations identified in conventional NGS using PC, specifically NRAS Q61R and NRAS G13D, were consistently detected in both Piseq-MM using BMAs and ctPiSeq-MM analyses. Almost all mutations (94.7%, 18/19) were detected in ctPiSeq-MM, except one mutation ( KRAS G12S) with a very low VAF of 0.24% (Fig.  2 C, Supplementary Table S2 ). Furthermore, there was a substantial correlation between the VAF of Piseq-MM using BMAs and ctPiSeq-MM ( r  = 0.794, p  = 0.0001; Fig.  2 D), indicating a strong concordance between the mutation profiles obtained from both methods.

Based on our initial observations in a small exploratory test cohort, we proceeded to validate our findings in a separate cohort of eight MM patients to assess the concordance of detected mutations between gDNA from BMA and ctDNA using the 112 gene NGS panel. For this validation cohort, the median sequencing depths of PiSeq-MM using BMAs and ctPiseq-MM were 60,444× and 78,862×, respectively.

We identified a total of 78 somatic mutations from PiSeq-MM using BMAs and 45 somatic mutations from ctPiseq-MM (Supplementary Table S3 ). The median VAF of somatic mutations detected in PiSeq-MM using BMAs was 0.15% (range: 0.04 − 9.58%), while the median VAF of mutations in ctPiSeq-MM was 0.96% (range: 0.09 − 21.19%).

Among the mutations detected, 25 mutations were shared in both PiSeq-MM using BMAs and ctPiSeq-MM of matched patients. There was a moderate degree of correlation between the VAF of PiSeq-MM using BMAs and ctPiSeq-MMs ( r  = 0.665, p  = 0.0003; Fig.  3 A). These results suggest a reasonable concordance in mutation detection between the two sample types, further supporting the potential utility of ctDNA analysis in MM.

(A) Correlation of SNV/indel allele frequency between PiSeq-MM using BMA and ctPiSeq-MM with a 112 gene targeted panel in the validation cohort. Mutation spectrum of (B) ctPiSeq-MM and  (C) Piseq-MM using BMAs in the validation cohort

In all eight patients, at least one mutation was detected in both the BMA and blood samples. On average, PiSeq-MM using BMAs identified 11 mutations (range: 2–16), whereas ctPiSeq-MMs detected 6 mutations (range: 1–11). Interestingly, the most frequently mutated gene in the blood samples was KMT2C (Fig.  3 B ) . In contrast, the most frequently mutated gene detected in PiSeq-MM using BMAs was DNMT3A , followed by KMT2C , TP53 , MGA , ATM , and KRAS (Fig.  3 C). These findings provide valuable insights into the mutational landscape of MM, and highlight differences in mutation frequencies between the two sample types.

In one patient (S4), a CNV was detected, specifically a partial KIT gene deletion involving deletion of exons 8–21. Notably, this CNV was detected only in PiSeq-MM using BMAs and not in ctPiSeq-MMs.

Chromosomal abnormalities and detection challenges in MM patients: insights from multiple NGS protocols

In the exploratory set, a majority of patients (83.3%, 5/6) exhibited chromosomal structural abnormalities as determined by cytogenetic analysis. Specifically, two patients (P1 and P6) showed hyperdiploidy, while three patients (P2, P3, and P5) had complex karyotypes. Notably, cases displaying hyperdiploidy in karyotyping also had identifiable chromosomal abnormalities in conventional NGS using PC, PiSeq-MM using BMA, and ctPiseq-MM. However, it is essential to acknowledge that the chromosomal abnormality results using NGS may not be entirely consistent with karyotyping (Fig.  4 ).

Chromosome analysis results by test method in patients with hyperdiploidy: (A) P1 and (B) P6

In contrast, patients with complex karyotypes or normal karyotypes sometimes exhibited abnormalities in conventional NGS using PC or Piseq-MM with BMA. However, interestingly, ctPiseq-MM did not show abnormalities in cases with normal karyotypes. This finding reveals the limitations of whole gene CNV analysis when using blood samples (Supplementary Fig.  1 ). Additionally, even when employing the Piseq algorithm in the samples from the validation cohort, it was challenging to detect chromosome abnormalities using whole gene CNV analysis (Supplementary Fig.  2 ).

Implementation of the Piseq Algorithm for NGS analysis in MM patients

Based on the insights gained from this study, we adopted the Piseq algorithm for BMAs from MM patients undergoing NGS, commencing in March 2022. NGS testing was initiated using plasma cell-enriched BMAs. In cases where enrichment was unsuccessful, the analysis was conducted on total BMAs. Between March 2022 and July 2023, 16 BMAs were subjected to NGS (Supplementary Table S4 ). The median arrival time at the laboratory was 41.0 h (range: 39.0–112.3 h), with plasma cell enrichment failing in the majority of cases (14/16, 87.5%).

Despite relying on total BMAs for most cases, mutations were identified in all samples, with potential driver mutations detected in 14 of 16 samples. The median VAF spanned from 0.1 to 46.6%, while the plasma cell burden in BMAs ranged from 10.8 to 99.6%. Notably, the median VAF of mutations and the plasma cell burden in BMAs showed no correlation ( p  = 0.793).

Genetic variants have been linked to drug resistance and prognosis in MM patients [ 23 , 24 , 25 ], and NGS tests, cytogenetic studies, and FISH analyses are crucial for comprehensive genetic analysis. Additionally, detecting residual cancer or low-fraction mutations requires very sensitive methods. Enriching plasma cells from bone marrow aspirations is a commonly employed technique to enhance detection sensitivity in FISH analysis and NGS [ 26 ]. However, this enrichment step adds labor and technical costs and necessitates timely sample delivery to prevent CD138 shedding [ 27 ], which can lead to false negative results. False negatives may also occur in cases where plasma cell neoplasms lack CD138 expression, although this is rare [ 26 ]. Other challenges of plasma enrichment in clinical laboratories include the need for relatively large sample amounts, and occasional failure. These limitations show the need for an alternate strategy for profiling unenriched cells (Table  2 ).

Error-corrected bioinformatics can help to overcome the limitations of the plasma cell enrichment step while still generating compatible mutation analysis data for plasma cell- unenriched total BMA samples. When utilizing samples collected within a 24-hour timeframe, the enrichment process using the MAC method has been reported to exhibit a failure rate ranging between 10 and 22% depending on the plasma cell burden in the bone marrow [ 28 ]. Moreover, enrichment failure was observed in 16.7% (1/6) of an exploratory set using fresh BMA samples in this study. However, in clinical samples from actual patients, the failure rate of the enrichment step exceeded expectations, likely due to the extended duration between bone marrow sample aspiration and the enrichment process.

Despite the predominant use of total BMAs, mutations were identified across all samples, with potential driver mutations identified in most cases. In clinical testing with patient specimens, enrichment often encounters failures, potentially exacerbated by prolonged transit time of specimens when samples are referred to other medical facilities. The VAF of mutations was notably low, considering the plasma cell fractions of BMAs. Some mutations were detected only in conventional NGS using PCs, and these mutations tended to have lower VAFs than those detected by PiSeq-MM using BMAs. This discrepancy could arise from reduced plasma cell fractions that include other hematopoietic cells or hemodilution when using total BMA.

Although the average VAF of these mutations was lower than that of mutations detected simultaneously in the total BMA, some mutations had VAFs exceeding 45% (e.g., IGLL5 M42T (P2) and, ZFHX4 P3154A (P6)). This difference is thought to be due to variations in clone composition caused by the degree of hemodilution in the BMAs used for the tests. Conventional NGS using PCs was conducted using fresh, first or second pulled BMAs obtained during the aspiration procedure. In cases of PiseqMM using BMAs, frozen aliquots likely included subsequently aspirated samples. As a result, differences in clone burden and composition might exist between the samples [ 29 ]. However, in our study, these 14 mutations were not clinically significantly different in terms of diagnostic outcomes. In contrast, the nine mutations detected by both methods had a higher average VAFs compared to those found only by conventional NGS using PCs, including clinically significant NRAS gene mutations. Therefore, mutations detected in both tests are likely crucial for the disease, regardless of VAF, and may represent founder mutations that occurred early in clonal evolution and are shared among various clones. In addition, working with total BMA instead of sorted PCs may have disadvantages related to clonality/subclonality determination, our method effectively detected variants with VAF as low as 5%, ensuring variant identification across all samples and detect key mutations in disease development.

However, due to the relatively low VAF and difficulties in CNV analysis at the whole genome level, plasma cell-enriched BMA samples remain optimal for genetic analysis. Therefore, the most accurate option for NGS analysis remains plasma cell-enriched BMA with error-corrected bioinformatics. Nevertheless, if plasma cell enrichment is not feasible due to limited sample size or technical issues, applying error-corrected bioinformatics alone can still detect some informative mutations for risk stratification.

Although BMA is the preferred sample for sequencing, its ability to detect MM clones may be hindered by an inhomogeneous infiltration pattern [ 30 ]. In recent years, ctDNA analysis has emerged as an alternative method for tissue genomic DNA analysis and monitoring residual cancers noninvasively in many solid cancers [ 8 , 14 ]. Our study demonstrated that ctDNA testing with error-corrected bioinformatics not only yielded similar results to bone marrow samples but also detected mutations with low variant frequency.

This study was conducted with a very small number of patient samples. Therefore, it is challenging to interpret the results as representative of the mutation prevalence in the MM patient population. However, the mutations with a high prevalence in larger existing MM cohorts with NGS data such as those in the KRAS , NRAS , and TP53 genes were identified in the total BMA (eight validation cohort and fourteen clinical patients whose plasma cell enrichment failed) and blood samples (eight validation cohort) of patients using Piseq algorithm (Supplementary Table S5 ). This suggests general concordance with the findings of existing studies [ 3 , 31 , 32 ]. However, DNMT3A and KMT2C mutations were observed at higher frequency in total BMA and blood samples compared to other studies. Kogure et al. [ 33 ]. reported the same pattern in ctDNA analysis in relapsed/refractory MM patients, in whom the majority of mutations in clonal hematopoietic (CH)-related genes, such as DNMT3A and TET2 were detected only by ctDNA, in line with our results. CH gene mutations might have originated from nonmalignant hematopoietic cells not only in blood, but also in BMA, resulting in greater detection of CH mutations with very low frequency when using our PiseqMM. However, this should be further researched with a larger cohort to determine whether the detection frequency is indeed higher when applying this method to the MM patient group.

By jointly analyzing and interpreting genetic results from both BMA and ctDNA analyses in MM patients, not only disease monitoring but also information on the mutation spectrum of myeloma burden from sites other than the biopsy can be obtained. This approach proves valuable even in challenging scenarios, such as plasmacytoma or a dry-tapped marrow [ 34 , 35 ]. Moreover, recent study suggesting risk stratification model using ctDNA mutations in relapsed/refractory patients highlights the possible clinical application of ctDNA in near future [ 33 ].

As this was a pilot study for method validation, further research involving a larger number of patients is required in the future. More extensive investigations are also necessary to confirm the association between the obtained results and prognosis. Prospective studies on MM patients, including those with plasmacytoma, will be essential to establish the ctDNA test method’s utility as a comprehensive genetic analysis tool.

This research provides valuable insights into the genetic landscape of MM and highlights the advantages of error-corrected NGS for detecting low-frequency mutations. The results suggest that PiSeq-MM can effectively detect somatic mutations in MM patients without the need for plasma cell enrichment. ctDNA analysis showed potential utility in identifying somatic mutations in malignant plasma cells. Although the current standard method for mutation analysis is still the use of plasma cell-enriched BMAs, total BMA or ctDNA testing with error correction is a viable alternative when plasma cell enrichment is not feasible.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, [SS], upon reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Multiple Myeloma

Next-Generation Sequencing

Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization

Fluorescence Immunophenotyping and Interphase Cytogenetics as a Tool for the Investigation of Neoplasms

Fluorescence-Activated Cell Sorter

Magnetic-Activated Cell Sorting

Circulating Tumor DNA

Measurable Residual Disease

Variant Allele Frequencies

Positional Indexing Sequencing

Bone Marrow Aspirate

Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells

Genomic DNA

Copy Number Variants

International Myeloma Working Group

Rajkumar SV. Multiple myeloma: 2022 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management. Am J Hematol. 2022;97(8):1086–107.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Kyle R, Rajkumar SV. Criteria for diagnosis, staging, risk stratification and response assessment of multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2009;23(1):3–9.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Lohr JG, Stojanov P, Carter SL, Cruz-Gordillo P, Lawrence MS, Auclair D, Sougnez C, Knoechel B, Gould J, Saksena G, et al. Widespread genetic heterogeneity in multiple myeloma: implications for targeted therapy. Cancer Cell. 2014;25(1):91–101.

Chapman MA, Lawrence MS, Keats JJ, Cibulskis K, Sougnez C, Schinzel AC, Harview CL, Brunet JP, Ahmann GJ, Adli M, et al. Initial genome sequencing and analysis of multiple myeloma. Nature. 2011;471(7339):467–72.

Stevens-Kroef M, Weghuis DO, Croockewit S, Derksen L, Hooijer J, Elidrissi-Zaynoun N, Siepman A, Simons A, Kessel AG. High detection rate of clinically relevant genomic abnormalities in plasma cells enriched from patients with multiple myeloma. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2012;51(11):997–1006.

Lu G, Muddasani R, Orlowski RZ, Abruzzo LV, Qazilbash MH, You MJ, Wang Y, Zhao M, Chen S, Glitza IC, et al. Plasma cell enrichment enhances detection of high-risk cytogenomic abnormalities by fluorescence in situ hybridization and improves risk stratification of patients with plasma cell neoplasms. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013;137(5):625–31.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hartmann L, Biggerstaff JS, Chapman DB, Scott JM, Johnson KR, Ghirardelli KM, Fritschle WK, Martinez DL, Bennington RK, de Baca ME, et al. Detection of genomic abnormalities in multiple myeloma: the application of FISH analysis in combination with various plasma cell enrichment techniques. Am J Clin Pathol. 2011;136(5):712–20.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Ghannam J, Dillon LW, Hourigan CS. Next-generation sequencing for measurable residual disease detection in acute myeloid leukaemia. Br J Haematol. 2020;188(1):77–85.

Heuser M, Freeman SD, Ossenkoppele GJ, Buccisano F, Hourigan CS, Ngai LL, Tettero JM, Bachas C, Baer C, Béné MC, et al. 2021 Update on MRD in acute myeloid leukemia: a consensus document from the European LeukemiaNet MRD Working Party. Blood. 2021;138(26):2753–67.

Wang TT, Abelson S, Zou J, Li T, Zhao Z, Dick JE, Shlush LI, Pugh TJ, Bratman SV. High efficiency error suppression for accurate detection of low-frequency variants. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47(15):e87.

Schmitt MW, Kennedy SR, Salk JJ, Fox EJ, Hiatt JB, Loeb LA. Detection of ultra-rare mutations by next-generation sequencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109(36):14508–13.

Newman AM, Lovejoy AF, Klass DM, Kurtz DM, Chabon JJ, Scherer F, Stehr H, Liu CL, Bratman SV, Say C, et al. Integrated digital error suppression for improved detection of circulating tumor DNA. Nat Biotechnol. 2016;34(5):547–55.

Pécuchet N, Rozenholc Y, Zonta E, Pietrasz D, Didelot A, Combe P, Gibault L, Bachet JB, Taly V, Fabre E, et al. Analysis of base-position error rate of Next-Generation sequencing to detect tumor mutations in circulating DNA. Clin Chem. 2016;62(11):1492–503.

Lee KS, Seo J, Lee CK, Shin S, Choi Z, Min S, Yang JH, Kwon WS, Yun W, Park MR, et al. Analytical and clinical validation of cell-free circulating tumor DNA assay for the estimation of Tumor Mutational Burden. Clin Chem. 2022;68(12):1519–28.

Kim JJ, Jang JE, Lee HA, Park MR, Kook HW, Lee ST, Choi JR, Min YH, Shin S, Cheong JW. Development of a next-generation sequencing-based Gene Panel Test to detect measurable residual disease in Acute myeloid leukemia. Ann Lab Med. 2023;43(4):328–36.

Rajkumar SV, Dimopoulos MA, Palumbo A, Blade J, Merlini G, Mateos MV, Kumar S, Hillengass J, Kastritis E, Richardson P, et al. International Myeloma Working Group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(12):e538–548.

Weissbach S, Heredia-Guerrero SC, Barnsteiner S, Grosshans L, Bodem J, Starz H, Langer C, Appenzeller S, Knop S, Steinbrunn T et al. Exon-4 mutations in KRAS affect MEK/ERK and PI3K/AKT signaling in human multiple myeloma cell lines. Cancers 2020, 12(2).

Walker BA, Mavrommatis K, Wardell CP, Ashby TC, Bauer M, Davies FE, Rosenthal A, Wang H, Qu P, Hoering A, et al. Identification of novel mutational drivers reveals oncogene dependencies in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2018;132(6):587–97.

Punnoose EA, Leverson JD, Peale F, Boghaert ER, Belmont LD, Tan N, Young A, Mitten M, Ingalla E, Darbonne WC, et al. Expression Profile of BCL-2, BCL-XL, and MCL-1 predicts pharmacological response to the BCL-2 selective antagonist Venetoclax in multiple myeloma models. Mol Cancer Ther. 2016;15(5):1132–44.

Lu G, Middleton RE, Sun H, Naniong M, Ott CJ, Mitsiades CS, Wong K-K, Bradner JE, Kaelin WG. The Myeloma Drug Lenalidomide promotes the Cereblon-Dependent Destruction of Ikaros Proteins. Science. 2014;343(6168):305–9.

Keats JJ, Fonseca R, Chesi M, Schop R, Baker A, Chng W-J, Van Wier S, Tiedemann R, Shi C-X, Sebag M, et al. Promiscuous mutations activate the noncanonical NF-κB pathway in multiple myeloma. Cancer Cell. 2007;12(2):131–44.

Annunziata CM, Davis RE, Demchenko Y, Bellamy W, Gabrea A, Zhan F, Lenz G, Hanamura I, Wright G, Xiao W, et al. Frequent Engagement of the classical and alternative NF-κB pathways by Diverse Genetic abnormalities in multiple myeloma. Cancer Cell. 2007;12(2):115–30.

Shirazi F, Jones RJ, Singh RK, Zou J, Kuiatse I, Berkova Z, Wang H, Lee HC, Hong S, Dick L, et al. Activating KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutants enhance proteasome capacity and reduce endoplasmic reticulum stress in multiple myeloma. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020;117(33):20004–14.

Flietner E, Wen Z, Rajagopalan A, Jung O, Watkins L, Wiesner J, You X, Zhou Y, Sun Y, Kingstad-Bakke B, et al. Ponatinib sensitizes myeloma cells to MEK inhibition in the high-risk VQ model. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):10616.

Hu Y, Chen W, Wang J. Progress in the identification of gene mutations involved in multiple myeloma. Onco Targets Ther. 2019;12:4075–80.

Pugh TJ, Fink JM, Lu X, Mathew S, Murata-Collins J, Willem P, Fang M. Assessing genome-wide copy number aberrations and copy-neutral loss-of-heterozygosity as best practice: an evidence-based review from the Cancer Genomics Consortium working group for plasma cell disorders. Cancer Genet. 2018;228–229:184–96.

Frigyesi I, Adolfsson J, Ali M, Kronborg Christophersen M, Johnsson E, Turesson I, Gullberg U, Hansson M, Nilsson B. Robust isolation of malignant plasma cells in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2014;123(9):1336–40.

Panakkal V, Rana S, Rathore S, Anshu A, Balakrishnan A, Singh C, Jandial A, Sachdeva MUS, Varma N, Lad D, et al. The success rate of interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization in plasma cell disorders can be improved using unconventional sources of plasma cells. Int J Lab Hematol. 2022;44(1):157–62.

Óskarsson JÞ, Rögnvaldsson S, Thorsteinsdottir S, Aspelund T, Gunnarsson SB, Hákonardóttir GK, Sigurðardóttir GÁ, Þórðardóttir ÁR, Gíslason GK, Ólafsson A, et al. Determining hemodilution in diagnostic bone marrow aspirated samples in plasma cell disorders by next-generation flow cytometry: proposal for a bone marrow quality index. Blood Cancer J. 2023;13(1):177.

Zamagni E, Tacchetti P, Barbato S, Cavo M. Role of imaging in the evaluation of minimal residual disease in multiple myeloma patients. J Clin Med 2020, 9(11).

Bolli N, Biancon G, Moarii M, Gimondi S, Li Y, de Philippis C, Maura F, Sathiaseelan V, Tai Y-T, Mudie L, et al. Analysis of the genomic landscape of multiple myeloma highlights novel prognostic markers and disease subgroups. Leukemia. 2018;32(12):2604–16.

Forbes SA, Beare D, Boutselakis H, Bamford S, Bindal N, Tate J, Cole CG, Ward S, Dawson E, Ponting L, et al. COSMIC: somatic cancer genetics at high-resolution. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;45(D1):D777–83.

Kogure Y, Handa H, Ito Y, Ri M, Horigome Y, Iino M, Harazaki Y, Kobayashi T, Abe M, Ishida T, et al. ctDNA improves prognostic prediction for patients with relapsed/refractory MM receiving ixazomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone. Blood. 2024;143(23):2401–13.

Long X, Xu Q, Lou Y, Li C, Gu J, Cai H, Wang D, Xu J, Li T, Zhou X, et al. The utility of non-invasive liquid biopsy for mutational analysis and minimal residual disease assessment in extramedullary multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 2020;189(2):e45–8.

Heestermans R, Schots R, De Becker A, Van Riet I. Liquid biopsies as non-invasive tools for mutation profiling in multiple myeloma: application potential, challenges, and opportunities. Int J Mol Sci 2024, 25(10).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Medical Illustration & Design, part of the Medical Research Support Services of Yonsei University College of Medicine, for all artistic support related to this work.

This research was supported by faculty research grant of Yonsei University College of Medicine for 2022 (6-2022-0085) and a grant from the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2022R1I1A1A01068590).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Laboratory Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yongin Severance Hospital, Yongin, Korea

Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hemato-Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yongin Severance Hospital, Yongin, Korea

Soo-Jeong Kim

Graduate School of Medical Science, Brain Korea PLUS Project, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea

Seoyoung Lim

Department of Laboratory Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Severance Hospital, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Korea

Seung-Tae Lee, Jong Rak Choi & Saeam Shin

Dxome, Seoul, Republic of Korea

Seung-Tae Lee & Jong Rak Choi

Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yongin Severance Hospital, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Republic of Korea

Doh Yu Hwang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

DYH and SS conceived and designed the analysis; JJK and SJK managed specimen collection and collected the data; SL, STL and JRC contributed data and analysis tools, JJK performed the analysis; JJK wrote the manuscript, SS reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Saeam Shin or Doh Yu Hwang .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

The Institutional Review Board at Yongin Severance hospital approved this study (IRB number 9-2023-0154), and all methods were carried out in accordance with the approved guidelines. All patients were registered to the prospective cohort study after written informed consents.

Consent for publication

Patient participation in the study was voluntary and they all signed consent forms, including consent to publish.

Competing interests

Authors ST Lee and JR Choi were employed by company Dxome. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Kim, J.J., Kim, SJ., Lim, S. et al. Enhancing mutation detection in multiple myeloma with an error-corrected ultra-sensitive NGS assay without plasma cell enrichment. Cancer Cell Int 24 , 282 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12935-024-03470-7

Download citation

Received : 20 September 2023

Accepted : 31 July 2024

Published : 12 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12935-024-03470-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Multiple myeloma
• Error-corrected next-generation sequencing
• Circulating tumor DNA
• Plasma cell enrichment

Cancer Cell International

ISSN: 1475-2867

• General enquiries: [email protected]