Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T20:30:07.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Using focus groups in radiation therapy research: Ethical and practical considerations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 November 2011

Caroline. A. Wright*
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia
Michal. E. Schneider-Kolsky
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia
Brian Jolly
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia
Marilyn. A. Baird
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia
*
Correspondence to: Caroline A. Wright, Department of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia. Tel: 0061 39952741. Fax: 0061 399058149. E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Focus groups are a means of gathering qualitative data from a group of participants who discuss a given topic. This method has been used in health care research for the past 30 years, but has seen limited use in radiation therapy research. Focus group discussions are a useful tool for investigating a variety of educational, training and clinical issues from the perspective of practitioners, students and patients. This paper reviews the issues associated with using focus groups as a means of data collection. In particular, it addresses some of the decisions which have to be made about group composition and conduct of the discussions. The literature review is contextualised using a recent example of how the authors used focus groups to investigate fitness to practise in radiation therapy. Other challenges such as familiarity between participants and researchers, power relationships and anonymity are addressed. The paper concludes with a consideration of data analysis.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Halkett, GKB, Merchant, S, Jiwa, M, Short, M, Arnet, H, Richardson, S et al. Effective communication and information provision in radiotherapy? The role of radiation therapists. J Radiother Pract 2010; 9:316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cashell, A. Radiation therapists? Perspectives of the role of reflection in clinical practice. J Radiother Pract 2010; 9:131141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eddy, A. Work-based learning and role extension: a match made in heaven? Radiography 2010; 16:95100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolderston, A, Lewis, D, Chai, MJ. The concept of caring: perceptions of radiation therapists. Radiography 2010; 16:198208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitzinger, J. Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups. BMJ 1995; 311:299302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rice, P, Ezzy, D, editors Qualitative Research Methods. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Wright, CA, Jolly, B, Schneider-Kolsky, ME, Baird, MA. Defining fitness to practise in Australian radiation therapy: a focus group study. Radiography 2011; 17:613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coyne, JC, Calarco, MM. Effects of the experience of depression: application of focus group and survey methodologies. Psychiatry 1995; 58:149163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fitzpatrick, R, Boulton, M. Qualitative methods for assessing health care. Qual Health Care 1994; 3:107113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Earle, EA, Davies, H, Greenfield, D, Ross, R, Eiser, C. Follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors: a focus group analysis. Eur J Cancer 2005; 41:28822886.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tomlinson, D, Capra, M, Gammon, J et al. Parental decision making in pediatric cancer end-of-life care: using focus group methodology as a prephase to seek participant design input. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2006; 10:198206.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wallace, M, Storms, S. The needs of men with prostate cancer: results of a focus group study. Appl Nurs Res 2007; 20:181187.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan, DL. Focus Groups as Qualitative Research, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE 1997, p. 6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merton, RK, Kendal, PL. The focused interview. Am J Sociol 1946; 51:541557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mates, D, Allison, KR. Sources of stress and coping responses of high school students. Adolescence 1992; 27:461474.Google ScholarPubMed
Carey, MA, Smith, MW. Capturing the group effect in focus groups: a special concern in analysis. Qual Health Res 1994; 4:123127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, L, Brooks, W, Hamilton, S. Exploring nurses perspectives of stroke care. Nurs Stand 2004; 19:3338.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frey, JH, Fontana, A. The group interview in social research. Social Sci J 1991; 28:175187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Donnell, AB, Lutfey, KE, Marceau, LD, McKinlay, JB. Using focus groups to improve the validity of cross-national survey research: a study of physician decision making. Qual Health Res 2007; 17:971981.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stewart, DW, Shamdasani, PN. Focus Groups: Theory and Practice. Newbury Park, California: SAGE, 1990.Google Scholar
Morgan, DL. The Focus Group Guide Book (Focus Group Kit, vol.1.). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE, 1998.Google Scholar
Butterworth, T, Bishop, V. Identifying the characteristics of optimum practice: findings from a survey of practice experts in nursing, midwifery and health visiting. J Adv Nurs 1995; 22:2432.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Madriz, E. Focus groups in feminist research. In Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE, 2000.Google Scholar
Kidd, PS, Parshall, MB. Getting the focus and the group: enhancing analytical rigor in focus group research. Qual Health Res 2000; 10:293308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, MW. Ethics in focus groups: a few concerns. Qual Health Res 1995; 5:478486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minichiello, V, Sullivan, G, Greenwood, K, Axford, R. Handbook for Research Methods in Health Sciences. Australia: Pearson Education, 1999.Google Scholar
Smith, MW. Ethics in focus groups: a few concerns. Qual Health Res 1995; 5:478486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, DL. ‘Why things (sometimes) go wrong with focus groups’. Qual Health Res 1995; 5:516523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarantakos, S. Social Research. South Yarra, Victoria: Macmillan, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miles, MB, Huberman, AM. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE, 1994.Google Scholar
Curtis, E, Redmond, R. Focus groups in nursing research. Nurse Researcher 2007; 14:2537.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Howatson-Jones, IL. Dilemmas of focus group recruitment and implementation: a pilot perspective. Nurse Res 2007; 14:717.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacDougall, C, Fudge, E. Planning and recruiting the sample for focus groups and in-depth interviews. Qual Health Res 2001; 11:117126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krueger, RA, Casey, MA. Focus Groups, 3rd edn. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE, 2000.Google Scholar
Curtis, E, Redmond, R. Focus groups in nursing research.[see comment]. Nurse Researcher 2007; 14:2537.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Folch-Lyon, E, de la Macorra, L, Schearer, SB. Focus group and survey research on family planning in Mexico. Stud Fam Plann 1981; 12:409432.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saint-Germain, MA, Bassford, TL, Montano, G. Surveys and focus groups in health care research with older Hispanic women. Qual Health Res 1993; 3:341367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puchta, C, Potter, J. Focus Group Practice. London: SAGE, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruff, CC, Alexander, IM, McKie, C. The use of focus group methodology in health disparities research. Nurs Outlook 2005; 53:134140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan, DL. Designing focis group research. In: Stewart, M, Tudiver, F, Bass, M, Dunn, E, Norton, P, editors. Tools for Primary Care Research. Newbury Park, California: SAGE, 1992.Google Scholar
Lederman, LC. Accessing educational effectiveness: the focus group interview as a technique for data collection. Commun Edu 1990; 38:117127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaughn, S, Shay Schum, J, Sinagub, J. Focus Group Interviews in Education and Psychology. California: SAGE, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkins, J. Tribalism, loss and grief: issues for multi-professional education. J Interprofessional Care 1998; 12:303307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reed, J, Payton, VR. Focus groups: issues of analysis and interpretation. J Adv Nurs 1997; 26:765771.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sim, J, Radloff, A. Profession and professionalisation in medical radiation science as an emergent profession. Radiography 2009; 15:203208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dey, I. Qualitative Data Analysis: A User Friendly Guide for Social Scientists. London: Routledge, 1993.Google Scholar
Fitness to practice panel appointed. Br Dental J 2003; 195:233235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lincoln, YS, Guba, EG. Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, PE. Focus groups: collecting aggregate-level data to understand community health phenomena. Public Health Nurs 1996; 13:170176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glaser, B. Emergence vs Forcing: Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociological Press, 1992.Google Scholar
Strauss, A. Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, DW, Shamdasani, PN. Focus Groups: Theory and Practice. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE, 1990.Google Scholar