Obtaining sensitive information: The need for more than focus groups

References

• D.L. Helitzer-Allen, C. Kendall. Explaining differences between qualitative and quantitative data: a study of chemoprophylaxis during pregnancy. Health Education Quarterly. 19(1): 1992
   Google Scholar
• J.P. Spradley. The Ethnographic Interview. 1979; Holt, Reinhart and Winston: New York.
   Google Scholar
• D.N. Bellenger, K.L. Bernhardt, J.L. Goldstucker. Qualitative Research in Marketing. 1976; American Marketing Association: Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• G.H. Smith. Motivation Research in Advertising and Marketing. 1954; McGraw Hill: New York.
   Google Scholar
• J.B. Higgenbotham, K.K. Cox. Focus Group Interviews: A Reader. 1979; American Marketing Association: Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• The most famous recent use of this was in George Bush’s 1988 campaign. See: How a murderer and a rapist became the Bush campaign’s most valuable player, excerpt from: Simon, R, 1990. Road Show. Farrar, Straus and Girouz, New York.
   Google Scholar
• NCl/HHS Pretesting in Health Communication. US Department of Health and Human Services, Publication 84-1493. 1984
   Google Scholar
• A.E. Goldman. The group depth interview. Journal of Marketing. 26: 1962; 61–68. (July).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D. Glik, A. Gordon. Focus group methods for formative research in child survival: an Ivoirian example. International Quarterly of Community Health Education. 8(4): 1987–1988
   Google Scholar
• L. Manderson, P. Aaby. An epidemic in the field? Rapid assessment procedures and health research. Social Science and Medicine. 37(7): 1992; 839–850.
   Google Scholar
• A MEDLINE search of journal articles published between 1989 and 1993 using the keyword ‘focus group discussion’ turned up 120 documents describing studies which used this method as the primary information-gathering method.
   Google Scholar
• C.E. Basch. Focus group interview: an underutilized research technique for improving theory and practice in health education. Health Education Quarterly. 14(4): 1987; 411–448.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Medium Term Plan. 1989; National AIDS Control Programme, Ministry of Health: Malawi.
   Google Scholar
• D.L. Helitzer-Allen. An investigation of communitybased communication networks of adolescent girls in rural Malawi for HIV/STD/AIDS prevention messages. 1993; International Center for Research on Women: Washington, DC, November.
   Google Scholar
• G. Liomba. Cultural practices and norms as a factor in HIV transmission Session No. 4: Cultural Aspects, 9th Congress of CAMAS Blantyre, Malawi March 1992
   Google Scholar
• E.M. Rogers, D.L. Kincaid. Communication Networks: Toward a New Paradigm for Research. 1981; The Free Press: New York.
   Google Scholar
• In community settings, the focus group discussion is often held outdoors under a tree, or in a spot which is separate and discrete but not ‘private’. While other community members are discouraged from joining the group, those who participate are visible to outsiders and thus the perception of the discussion as ‘public’. This impression remains despite assurances that the data will be kept confidential. In this case, ‘public’ refers to the open knowledge of who participated in the group discussion and that other participants could reveal the information shared in the discussion in a way that might jeopardise the confidentiality of participants’ statements.
   Google Scholar
• M.E. Khan, M. Anker, B.C. Patel. The use of focus groups in social and behavioural research: some methodological issues. World Health Statistical Quarterly. 44: 1991; 145–149.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• C. Vlassoff. Contributions of the micro-approach to social sciences research. 1987. Report prepared for IDRC, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• J. Gittelsohn, J. Anliker, S. Davis. American Indian schoolchildren obesity prevention study formative assessment protocol. 1994. Draft No. 4. February.
   Google Scholar
• D. Reibstein. Marketing: Concepts, Strategies and Decisions. 1985; Prentiss Hall.
   Google Scholar