PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 15831139

Focus-group interview and data analysis.

Abstract

In recent years focus-group interviews, as a means of qualitative data collection, have gained popularity amongst professionals within the health and social care arena. Despite this popularity, analysing qualitative data, particularly focus-group interviews, poses a challenge to most practitioner researchers. The present paper responds to the needs expressed by public health nutritionists, community dietitians and health development specialists following two training sessions organised collaboratively by the Health Development Agency, the Nutrition Society and the British Dietetic Association in 2003. The focus of the present paper is on the concepts and application of framework analysis, especially the use of Krueger's framework. It provides some practical steps for the analysis of individual data, as well as focus-group data using examples from the author's own research, in such a way as to assist the newcomer to qualitative research to engage with the methodology. Thus, it complements the papers by Draper (2004) and Fade (2004) that discuss in detail the complementary role of qualitative data in researching human behaviours, feelings and attitudes. Draper (2004) has provided theoretical and philosophical bases for qualitative data analysis. Fade (2004) has described interpretative phenomenology analysis as a method of analysing individual interview data. The present paper, using framework analysis concentrating on focus-group interviews, provides another approach to qualitative data analysis.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Fatemeh Rabiee. 2004. Focus-group interview and data analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1079/pns2004399

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: audit of primary sources.

OBJECTIVE: To describe where papers come from in a systematic review of complex evidence. Method Audit of how the 495 primary sources for the review were originally identified. RESULTS: Only 30% of sources were obtained from the protocol defined at the outset of the study (that is, from the database and hand searches). Fifty one per cent were identified by "snowballing" (such as pursuing references of references), and 24% by personal knowledge or personal contacts. CONCLUSION: Systematic reviews of complex evidence cannot rely solely on protocol-driven search strategies.

Data Collection↗

Science and law. When should judges admit or compel genetic tests?

During the past two decades, the use of DNA tests has revolutionized court proceedings in criminal and paternity cases. On the horizon is a new challenge for judges--whether to admit or compel genetic tests to confirm or predict genetic diseases and conditions in many more judicial contexts, e.g., decisions regarding culpability, sentencing, liability, causation, and damages. This Policy Forum reports on an empirical study of how judges would analyze these issues. The authors discuss the challenges these types of cases will bring to the court-room and suggest a series of questions that judges should consider in evaluating the need for genetic information in legal cases.

Data Collection↗