Literature DB >> 20393074

Conducting qualitative research on cervical cancer screening among diverse groups of immigrant women: research reflections: challenges and solutions.

Tina L Karwalajtys1, Lynda J Redwood-Campbell, Nancy C Fowler, Lynne H Lohfeld, Michelle Howard, Janusz A Kaczorowski, Alice Lytwyn.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To explore the research lessons learned in the process of conducting qualitative research on cervical cancer screening perspectives among multiple ethnolinguistic groups of immigrant women and to provide guidance to family medicine researchers on methodologic and practical issues related to planning and conducting focus group research with multiple immigrant groups.
DESIGN: Observations based on a qualitative study of 11 focus groups.
SETTING: Hamilton, Ont. PARTICIPANTS: Women from 1 of 5 ethnolinguistic immigrant groups and Canadian-born women of low socioeconomic status.
METHODS: We conducted 11 focus groups using interactive activities and tools to learn about women's views of cervical cancer screening, and we used our research team reflections, deliberate identification of preconceptions or potential biases, early and ongoing feedback from culturally representative field workers, postinterview debriefings, and research team debriefings as sources of information to inform the process of such qualitative research. MAIN
FINDINGS: Our learnings pertain to 5 areas: forming effective research teams and community partnerships; culturally appropriate ways of accessing communities and recruiting participants; obtaining written informed consent; using sensitive or innovative data collection approaches; and managing budget and time requirements. Important elements included early involvement, recruitment, and training of ethnolinguistic field workers in focus group methodologies, and they were key to participant selection, participation, and effective groups. Research methods (eg, recruitment approaches, inclusion criteria) needed to be modified to accommodate cultural norms. Recruitment was slower than anticipated. Acquiring signed consent might also require extra time. Novel approaches within focus groups increased the likelihood of more rich discussion about sensitive topics. High costs of professional translation might challenge methodologic rigour (eg, back-translation).
CONCLUSION: By employing flexible and innovative approaches and including members of the participating cultural groups in the research team, this project was successful in engaging multiple cultural groups in research. Our experiences can inform similar research by providing practical learning within the context of established qualitative methods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20393074      PMCID: PMC2860839     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Fam Physician        ISSN: 0008-350X            Impact factor:   3.275


  10 in total

Review 1.  Qualitative research in health care. Using qualitative methods in health related action research.

Authors:  J Meyer
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-01-15

Review 2.  Action research: a systematic review and guidance for assessment.

Authors:  H Waterman; D Tillen; R Dickson; K de Koning
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.014

3.  Ethnic minority older adults participating in clinical research: developing trust.

Authors:  Gina Moreno-John; Anthony Gachie; Candace M Fleming; Anna Nápoles-Springer; Elizabeth Mutran; Spero M Manson; Eliseo J Pérez-Stable
Journal:  J Aging Health       Date:  2004-11

4.  Enhancing research with migrant women through focus groups.

Authors:  Luciana Ruppenthal; Jodi Tuck; Anita J Gagnon
Journal:  West J Nurs Res       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 1.967

Review 5.  Strategies for successful conduct of research with low-income African American populations.

Authors:  Beatrice Adderley-Kelly; Pauline M Green
Journal:  Nurs Outlook       Date:  2005 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.250

Review 6.  Increasing minority research participation through community organization outreach.

Authors:  Roger A Alvarez; Elias Vasquez; Carla C Mayorga; Daniel J Feaster; Victoria B Mitrani
Journal:  West J Nurs Res       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 1.967

Review 7.  Literature review: considerations in undertaking focus group research with culturally and linguistically diverse groups.

Authors:  Elizabeth J Halcomb; Leila Gholizadeh; Michelle DiGiacomo; Jane Phillips; Patricia M Davidson
Journal:  J Clin Nurs       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.036

Review 8.  Attaining gender and ethnic diversity in health intervention research: cultural responsiveness versus resource provision.

Authors:  J H Flaskerud; A M Nyamathi
Journal:  ANS Adv Nurs Sci       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 1.824

Review 9.  Lessons learned: research with rural Mexican-American women.

Authors:  Alison Mann; Mary M Hoke; Jacquelyn C Williams
Journal:  Nurs Outlook       Date:  2005 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.250

10.  Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities.

Authors:  Vivek H Murthy; Harlan M Krumholz; Cary P Gross
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-06-09       Impact factor: 56.272

  10 in total
  9 in total

1.  'Before you teach me, I cannot know': immigrant women's barriers and enablers with regard to cervical cancer screening among different ethnolinguistic groups in Canada.

Authors:  Lynda Redwood-Campbell; Nancy Fowler; Stephanie Laryea; Michelle Howard; Janusz Kaczorowski
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2011 May-Jun

2.  Challenges in a Technology-Based Cancer Pain Management Program Among Asian American Breast Cancer Survivors.

Authors:  Eun-Ok Im; Xiaopeng Ji; Sangmi Kim; Eunice Chee; Ting Bao; Jun J Mao; Wonshik Chee
Journal:  Comput Inform Nurs       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 1.985

3.  When Life Got in the Way: How Danish and Norwegian Immigrant Women in Sweden Reason about Cervical Screening and Why They Postpone Attendance.

Authors:  Fatima Azerkan; Catarina Widmark; Pär Sparén; Elisabete Weiderpass; Per Tillgren; Elisabeth Faxelid
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Recruitment of Refugees for Health Research: A Qualitative Study to Add Refugees' Perspectives.

Authors:  Patricia Gabriel; Janusz Kaczorowski; Nicole Berry
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2017-01-29       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Barriers and Facilitators to Cervical Screening among Migrant Women of African Origin: A Qualitative Study in Finland.

Authors:  Esther E Idehen; Anna-Maija Pietilä; Mari Kangasniemi
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-10-14       Impact factor: 3.390

6.  Reasons behind Low Cervical Screening Uptake among South Asian Immigrant Women: A Qualitative Exploration.

Authors:  Zufishan Alam; Hanoor Deol; Judith Ann Dean; Monika Janda
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-01-28       Impact factor: 3.390

7.  Conducting Cancer Research among Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Groups in Australia: A Reflection on Challenges and Strategies.

Authors:  Cannas Kwok
Journal:  AIMS Public Health       Date:  2016-07-08

8.  Self-administered versus provider-directed sampling in the Anishinaabek Cervical Cancer Screening Study (ACCSS): a qualitative investigation with Canadian First Nations women.

Authors:  Ingeborg Zehbe; Pamela Wakewich; Amy-Dee King; Kyla Morrisseau; Candace Tuck
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 9.  Factors associated with cervical cancer screening participation among migrant women in Europe: a scoping review.

Authors:  Patrícia Marques; Mariana Nunes; Maria da Luz Antunes; Bruno Heleno; Sónia Dias
Journal:  Int J Equity Health       Date:  2020-09-11
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.