A standardized approach to qualitative content analysis of focus group discussions from different countries.

Health Research

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

A standardized approach to qualitative content analysis of focus group discussions from different countries. / Moretti, F; van Vliet, L; Bensing, J et al.
In: Patient Education and Counseling, Vol. 82, No. 3, 03.2011, p. 420-428.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Moretti, F, van Vliet, L, Bensing, J, Deledda, G, Mazzi, M, Rimondini, M, Zimmermann, C & Fletcher, I 2011, 'A standardized approach to qualitative content analysis of focus group discussions from different countries.', Patient Education and Counseling, vol. 82, no. 3, pp. 420-428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2011.01.005

APA

Moretti, F., van Vliet, L., Bensing, J., Deledda, G., Mazzi, M., Rimondini, M., Zimmermann, C., & Fletcher, I. (2011). A standardized approach to qualitative content analysis of focus group discussions from different countries. Patient Education and Counseling, 82(3), 420-428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2011.01.005

Vancouver

Moretti F, van Vliet L, Bensing J, Deledda G, Mazzi M, Rimondini M et al. A standardized approach to qualitative content analysis of focus group discussions from different countries. Patient Education and Counseling. 2011 Mar;82(3):420-428. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.01.005

Author

Moretti, F ; van Vliet, L ; Bensing, J et al. / A standardized approach to qualitative content analysis of focus group discussions from different countries. In: Patient Education and Counseling. 2011 ; Vol. 82, No. 3. pp. 420-428.

Bibtex

@article{c79192b503ff411b9015c19687f97f3e,

title = "A standardized approach to qualitative content analysis of focus group discussions from different countries.",

abstract = "ObjectiveTo describe the methodological procedures of a multi-centre focus group research for obtaining content categories also suitable for categorical statistical analyses.MethodsInductive content analyses were performed on a subsample of 27 focus groups conducted in three different countries, the Netherlands (Utrecht), the UK (Liverpool) and Italy (Verona). The analyses of the subsample of focus group discussions were performed in five steps: (1) independent development of content categories in each of the participating centres, (2) obtaining consensus categories, (3) creation of a manual with coding rules and defining criteria for categories and subcategories, (4) assessment of inter-rater reliability to identify unreliable categories to be revised, and (5) repetition of inter-rater reliability assessment.ResultsThe resulting coding system considers five areas: non verbal communication, process oriented expression, task oriented or problem focused expressions, affective or emotional expressions, and physician's personal characteristics. It contains 12 categories of acceptable inter-rater reliability and 41 subcategories.ConclusionThe coding procedures show how focus group data, obtained in an international multi-centre study can be analysed in a systematic way combining scientific rigour with the richness of data obtainable from qualitative methodologies.Practice implicationThe applied procedures may be helpful for multi-centre focus group research on other topics.",

keywords = "GULiVer study, Multi-centre focus groups , Inductive content analysis , Physicians{\textquoteright} communicative behaviors , Users{\textquoteright} perspective",

author = "F Moretti and {van Vliet}, L and J Bensing and G Deledda and M Mazzi and M Rimondini and C Zimmermann and Ian Fletcher",

year = "2011",

month = mar,

doi = "10.1016/j.pec.2011.01.005",

language = "English",

volume = "82",

pages = "420--428",

journal = "Patient Education and Counseling",

issn = "0738-3991",

publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",

number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - A standardized approach to qualitative content analysis of focus group discussions from different countries.

AU - Moretti, F

AU - van Vliet, L

AU - Bensing, J

AU - Deledda, G

AU - Mazzi, M

AU - Rimondini, M

AU - Zimmermann, C

AU - Fletcher, Ian

PY - 2011/3

Y1 - 2011/3

N2 - ObjectiveTo describe the methodological procedures of a multi-centre focus group research for obtaining content categories also suitable for categorical statistical analyses.MethodsInductive content analyses were performed on a subsample of 27 focus groups conducted in three different countries, the Netherlands (Utrecht), the UK (Liverpool) and Italy (Verona). The analyses of the subsample of focus group discussions were performed in five steps: (1) independent development of content categories in each of the participating centres, (2) obtaining consensus categories, (3) creation of a manual with coding rules and defining criteria for categories and subcategories, (4) assessment of inter-rater reliability to identify unreliable categories to be revised, and (5) repetition of inter-rater reliability assessment.ResultsThe resulting coding system considers five areas: non verbal communication, process oriented expression, task oriented or problem focused expressions, affective or emotional expressions, and physician's personal characteristics. It contains 12 categories of acceptable inter-rater reliability and 41 subcategories.ConclusionThe coding procedures show how focus group data, obtained in an international multi-centre study can be analysed in a systematic way combining scientific rigour with the richness of data obtainable from qualitative methodologies.Practice implicationThe applied procedures may be helpful for multi-centre focus group research on other topics.

AB - ObjectiveTo describe the methodological procedures of a multi-centre focus group research for obtaining content categories also suitable for categorical statistical analyses.MethodsInductive content analyses were performed on a subsample of 27 focus groups conducted in three different countries, the Netherlands (Utrecht), the UK (Liverpool) and Italy (Verona). The analyses of the subsample of focus group discussions were performed in five steps: (1) independent development of content categories in each of the participating centres, (2) obtaining consensus categories, (3) creation of a manual with coding rules and defining criteria for categories and subcategories, (4) assessment of inter-rater reliability to identify unreliable categories to be revised, and (5) repetition of inter-rater reliability assessment.ResultsThe resulting coding system considers five areas: non verbal communication, process oriented expression, task oriented or problem focused expressions, affective or emotional expressions, and physician's personal characteristics. It contains 12 categories of acceptable inter-rater reliability and 41 subcategories.ConclusionThe coding procedures show how focus group data, obtained in an international multi-centre study can be analysed in a systematic way combining scientific rigour with the richness of data obtainable from qualitative methodologies.Practice implicationThe applied procedures may be helpful for multi-centre focus group research on other topics.

KW - GULiVer study

KW - Multi-centre focus groups

KW - Inductive content analysis

KW - Physicians’ communicative behaviors

KW - Users’ perspective

U2 - 10.1016/j.pec.2011.01.005

DO - 10.1016/j.pec.2011.01.005

M3 - Journal article

VL - 82

SP - 420

EP - 428

JO - Patient Education and Counseling

JF - Patient Education and Counseling

SN - 0738-3991

IS - 3

ER -

Research

Associated organisational unit

Links

Text available via DOI:

Keywords