摘要：Many qualitative researchers reject textual conversion based on philosophical grounds although others believe it facilitates pattern recognition and meaning extraction. This article examined interview data from 52 physicians from a large academic medical center regarding work–life balance. Analysis ranked men and women in four career tracks: Clinician-Educator, Clinician-Researcher, Clinician-Practitioner, and residents. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate how a qualitatively driven (QUAL→quan) mixed method design illustrated differences between stratified groups. Although many initial codes were similar for men and women, their language was gendered and generational in context of work-life balance. Results indicated that women (and low-status men) expressed fewer strategies to successfully negotiate academic medicine. Quantitizing enhanced the interpretive description of adversity.
关键词：Mixed Methods; Work Balance; Academic Medicine; Gender; Quantitizing
