ArticleQualitative research : QR2025
Using interview excerpts to facilitate focus group discussion.
Article in Qualitative research : QR, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of an expert patient program for improving self-efficacy in surgical patients with advanced gastric cancer in China: a COREQ-guided qualitative expert panel discussion study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Integrating Occupational Health and Safety and Health Promotion: A Qualitative Study in Australia.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026Article
- Lived experience perspectives on resilience, mental health, and wellbeing: a focus group study of individual, social, and systemic determinants in Aotearoa New Zealand.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Paradox of AI in Higher Education: Qualitative Inquiry Into AI Dependency Among Educators in Palestine.JMIR medical education · 2025Article
- Exploring Chinese Consumers' Perception and Potential Acceptance of Cell-Cultured Meat and Plant-Based Meat: A Focus Group Study and Content Analysis.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Health workers' perspectives on self-monitoring of blood pressure by pregnant women: a qualitative study among community health workers, midwives, doctors and health system managers in Lombok, Indonesia.BMJ global health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The use of interviews and focus groups is well-established in the social science methods literature. However, discussion on how research can combine these two methods in creative ways is less common. While researchers are generally aware of the potential of focus groups for further probing issues that emerge in one-on-one interviews, few studies detail how this might be achieved in practice. In this article, we describe and reflect on a focus group elicitation strategy that uses individual interview excerpts to facilitate discussion in group settings. In our reflection, we draw on a study that investigated the sharing of embryo images in fertility treatment. The article contributes to the methods literature firstly, by reflecting on the novel use of individual interview material in focus groups and secondly, by discussing the re-enactment of interview excerpts as an effective audio elicitation tool to be used in the later stages of research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.