Individual interviews and focus groups in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison of two qualitative methods
Individual interviews and focus groups in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison of two qualitative methods
Purpose. To compare two different approaches to performing focus groups and individual interviews, an open approach, and an approach based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).
Methods. Patients with rheumatoid arthritis attended focus groups (n = 49) and individual interviews (n = 21). Time, number of concepts, ICF categories identified, and sample size for reaching saturation of data were compared. Descriptive statistics, Chi-square tests, and independent t tests were performed.
Results. With an overall time of 183 h, focus groups were more time consuming than individual interviews (t = 9.782; P < 0.001). In the open approach, 188 categories in the focus groups and 102 categories in the interviews were identified compared to the 231 and 110 respective categories identified in the ICF-based approach. Saturation of data was reached after performing five focus groups and nine individual interviews in the open approach and five focus groups and 12 individual interviews in the ICF-based approach.
Conclusion. The method chosen should depend on the objective of the study, issues related to the health condition, and the study’s participants. We recommend performing focus groups if the objective of the study is to comprehensively explore the patient perspective.
focus groups, individual interviews, qualitative research, rheumatoid arthritis, international classification of functioning, disability and health (icf)
359-370
Coenan, Michaela
42d76392-897a-4e79-808a-2b2c8d9e8378
Stamm, Tanja A.
eca8e044-ac66-43fa-b5c0-e7a0c1b26420
Stucki, Gerold
0534525c-103b-45be-b0a5-061d8867ef0d
Cieza, Alarcos
a0df25c5-ee2c-4580-82b3-d0a75591580e
March 2012
Coenan, Michaela
42d76392-897a-4e79-808a-2b2c8d9e8378
Stamm, Tanja A.
eca8e044-ac66-43fa-b5c0-e7a0c1b26420
Stucki, Gerold
0534525c-103b-45be-b0a5-061d8867ef0d
Cieza, Alarcos
a0df25c5-ee2c-4580-82b3-d0a75591580e
Coenan, Michaela, Stamm, Tanja A., Stucki, Gerold and Cieza, Alarcos
(2012)
Individual interviews and focus groups in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison of two qualitative methods.
Quality of Life Research, 21 (2), .
(doi:10.1007/s11136-011-9943-2).
(PMID:21706128)
Abstract
Purpose. To compare two different approaches to performing focus groups and individual interviews, an open approach, and an approach based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).
Methods. Patients with rheumatoid arthritis attended focus groups (n = 49) and individual interviews (n = 21). Time, number of concepts, ICF categories identified, and sample size for reaching saturation of data were compared. Descriptive statistics, Chi-square tests, and independent t tests were performed.
Results. With an overall time of 183 h, focus groups were more time consuming than individual interviews (t = 9.782; P < 0.001). In the open approach, 188 categories in the focus groups and 102 categories in the interviews were identified compared to the 231 and 110 respective categories identified in the ICF-based approach. Saturation of data was reached after performing five focus groups and nine individual interviews in the open approach and five focus groups and 12 individual interviews in the ICF-based approach.
Conclusion. The method chosen should depend on the objective of the study, issues related to the health condition, and the study’s participants. We recommend performing focus groups if the objective of the study is to comprehensively explore the patient perspective.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
e-pub ahead of print date: 25 June 2011
Published date: March 2012
Keywords:
focus groups, individual interviews, qualitative research, rheumatoid arthritis, international classification of functioning, disability and health (icf)
Organisations:
Psychology
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 340801
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/340801
ISSN: 0962-9343
PURE UUID: d27a7244-0561-4d73-b7e9-ca2e1a5b0ca0
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 03 Jul 2012 10:16
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 11:30
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Michaela Coenan
Author:
Tanja A. Stamm
Author:
Gerold Stucki
Author:
Alarcos Cieza
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics