<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[A Blog Around The Clock]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://blog.coturnix.org]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Bora Zivkovic]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://blog.coturnix.org/author/coturnix/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research (in Medicine and&nbsp;elsewhere)]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<p>In a <a href="http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&amp;doi=10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0040258" target="_blank" title="">commentary</a> and a <a href="http://www.plos.org/cms/node/256" target="_blank" title="">blog post</a>, the editors of PLoS Medicine ask:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8230;.is there still a reluctance to accept that anything useful can be learned from research without numbers?</p></blockquote>
<p>An old question that tends to generate a lot of heat.  Where do you stand on it, within medicine or within your own area of research?</p>
]]></html></oembed>