Guadalupe X Ayala1, John P Elder. 1. Graduate School of Public Health, San Diego State University, 9245 Sky Park Court, Suite 220, San Diego, CA 92123, USA. gayala@projects.sdsu.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This paper introduces qualitative methods for assessing the acceptability of an intervention. METHODS: Acceptability refers to determining how well an intervention will be received by the target population and the extent to which the new intervention or its might meet the needs of the target population an d organizational setting. In this paper, we focus on two common qualitative methods for conducting acceptability research and their advantages and disadvantages: focus groups and interviews. RESULTS: We provide examples from our own research and other studies to demonstrate the use of these methods for conducting acceptability research and how one might adapt this approach for oral health research. DISCUSSION: We present emerging methods for conducting acceptability research, including the use of community-based participatory research, as well as the utility of conducting acceptability research for assessing the appropriateness of measures in intervention research.
OBJECTIVES: This paper introduces qualitative methods for assessing the acceptability of an intervention. METHODS: Acceptability refers to determining how well an intervention will be received by the target population and the extent to which the new intervention or its might meet the needs of the target population an d organizational setting. In this paper, we focus on two common qualitative methods for conducting acceptability research and their advantages and disadvantages: focus groups and interviews. RESULTS: We provide examples from our own research and other studies to demonstrate the use of these methods for conducting acceptability research and how one might adapt this approach for oral health research. DISCUSSION: We present emerging methods for conducting acceptability research, including the use of community-based participatory research, as well as the utility of conducting acceptability research for assessing the appropriateness of measures in intervention research.
Authors: J Matt Streng; Scott D Rhodes; Guadalupe X Ayala; Eugenia Eng; Ramiro Arceo; Selena Phipps Journal: J Interprof Care Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 2.338
Authors: Beena Thomas; Elizabeth F Closson; Katie Biello; Sunil Menon; Pandiaraja Navakodi; A Dhanalakshmi; Kenneth H Mayer; Steven A Safren; Matthew J Mimiaga Journal: Arch Sex Behav Date: 2015-12-29
Authors: S M Jack; N Catherine; A Gonzalez; H L MacMillan; D Sheehan; D Waddell Journal: Health Promot Chronic Dis Prev Can Date: 2015 Oct-Nov Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Alexandra M Lee; Sarah M Szurek; Abhaya Dilip; Jackson R Dillard; Darci R Miller; Ryan P Theis; Nuzhat Zaman; Janice Krieger; Lindsay A Thompson; David M Janicke; Michelle I Cardel Journal: Child Obes Date: 2021-03-01 Impact factor: 2.992
Authors: Kaitlyn Lapen; Christopher Sabol; Amy L Tin; Kathleen Lynch; Alyse Kassa; Xiaolin Mabli; John Ford; Elaine Cha; Michael B Bernstein; Lior Z Braunstein; Oren Cahlon; Bobby M Daly; Kiri Sandler; Susan A McCloskey; Andrew J Vickers; Atif J Khan; Erin F Gillespie Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2021-07-24 Impact factor: 7.038