Literature DB >> 10947477

Getting the focus and the group: enhancing analytical rigor in focus group research.

P S Kidd1, M B Parshall.   

Abstract

In the literature on focus groups, far more attention has been devoted to how groups are organized and conducted than to issues of analysis. Although exploitation of group dynamics is touted as a virtue of focus groups, there is very little guidance in the literature with respect to how differences between group and individual discourse impact the analysis and interpretation of focus group data. In this article, the authors describe analytical challenges inherent in the interpretation of focus group data and suggest approaches for enhancing the rigor of analysis and the reliability and validity of focus group findings.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10947477     DOI: 10.1177/104973200129118453

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Health Res        ISSN: 1049-7323


  119 in total

Review 1.  Living in dressings and bandages: findings from workshops with people with Epidermolysis bullosa.

Authors:  Patricia Grocott; Rebecca Blackwell; Heather Weir; Elizabeth Pillay
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2012-04-04       Impact factor: 3.315

2.  Autonomy, choice, patient-centered care, and hip protectors: the experience of residents and staff in long-term care.

Authors:  Joanie Sims-Gould; Heather A McKay; Fabio Feldman; Victoria Scott; Stephen N Robinovitch
Journal:  J Appl Gerontol       Date:  2013-06-11

3.  Identifying the informational and psychosocial needs of Chinese immigrant cancer patients: a focus group study.

Authors:  Jennifer Leng; Trevor Lee; Umut Sarpel; Jessy Lau; Yanjun Li; Connie Cheng; Ming-der Chang; Francesca Gany
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2012-04-25       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  Evaluative criteria for qualitative research in health care: controversies and recommendations.

Authors:  Deborah J Cohen; Benjamin F Crabtree
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2008 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.166

5.  Focus group study of public opinion about paying living kidney donors in Australia.

Authors:  Allison Tong; Angelique F Ralph; Jeremy R Chapman; Germaine Wong; John S Gill; Michelle A Josephson; Jonathan C Craig
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 8.237

6.  Disengagement beliefs in South Asian immigrant smokeless tobacco users: A qualitative study.

Authors:  Smita C Banerjee; Jamie S Ostroff; Thomas A D'Agostino; Sehrish Bari; Mitali Khera; Sudha Acharya; Francesca Gany
Journal:  Addict Res Theory       Date:  2013-08-20

7.  Barriers to using psycho-oncology services: a qualitative research into the perspectives of users, their relatives, non-users, physicians, and nurses.

Authors:  Melanie Neumann; Maren Galushko; Ute Karbach; Hadass Goldblatt; Adriaan Visser; Markus Wirtz; Nicole Ernstmann; Oliver Ommen; Holger Pfaff
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2009-09-02       Impact factor: 3.603

8.  Desiderata for Major Eligibility Criteria in Breast Cancer Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Matthew L Paulson; Chunhua Weng
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2015-11-05

9.  Patient and health professional views on rehabilitation practices and outcomes following total hip and knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis:a focus group study.

Authors:  Marie D Westby; Catherine L Backman
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2010-05-11       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Health professionals' attitudes towards using a Web 2.0 portal for child and adolescent diabetes care: qualitative study.

Authors:  Cecilia Nordqvist; Lena Hanberger; Toomas Timpka; Sam Nordfeldt
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2009-04-06       Impact factor: 5.428

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.