The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Focus-group interview and data analysis
Open accessAbstract
In recent years focus-group interviews, as a means of qualitative data collection, have gained popularity amongst professionals within the health and social care arena. Despite this popularity, analysing qualitative data, particularly focus-group interviews, poses a challenge to most practitioner researchers. The present paper responds to the needs expressed by public health nutritionists, community dietitians and health development specialists following two training sessions organised collaboratively by the Health Development Agency, the Nutrition Society and the British Dietetic Association in 2003. The focus of the present paper is on the concepts and application of framework analysis, especially the use of Krueger's framework. It provides some practical steps for the analysis of individual data, as well as focus-group data using examples from the author's own research, in such a way as to assist the newcomer to qualitative research to engage with the methodology. Thus, it complements the papers by Draper (2004) and Fade (2004) that discuss in detail the complementary role of qualitative data in researching human behaviours, feelings and attitudes. Draper (2004) has provided theoretical and philosophical bases for qualitative data analysis. Fade (2004) has described interpretative phenomenology analysis as a method of analysing individual interview data. The present paper, using framework analysis concentrating on focus-group interviews, provides another approach to qualitative data analysis.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research
Ritchie, J., & Spencer, L. (2010) · Analyzing qualitative data · doi:10.4324/9780203413081_chapter_9 · Cited by 4,800
The methodology of Focus Groups: the importance of interaction between research participants
Kitzinger, J. (1994) · Sociology of Health & Illness · doi:10.1111/1467-9566.ep11347023 · Cited by 3,870
Cited by
O.Nyumba, T., Wilson, K., Derrick, C. J., & Mukherjee, N. (2018) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12860 · Cited by 2,619
“To overcome this, Rabiee (2004) recommends that researchers may over- recruit by 10– 25%.”
BackgroundUsing focus groups in medical education research: AMEE Guide No. 91
Stalmeijer, R. E., McNaughton, N., & Van Mook, W. N. K. A. (2014) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2014.917165 · Cited by 608
Service robots in hotels: understanding the service quality perceptions of human-robot interaction
Choi, Y., Choi, M., Oh, M. (., & Kim, S. (. (2020) · Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management · doi:10.1080/19368623.2020.1703871 · Cited by 522
Bernués, A., Tello-García, E., Rodríguez-Ortega, T., Ripoll-Bosch, R., & Casasús, I. (2016) · Land Use Policy · doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.08.033 · Cited by 126
Practical early prediction of students’ performance using machine learning and eXplainable AI
Jang, Y., Choi, S., Jung, H., & Kim, H. (2022) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-022-11120-6 · Cited by 114
Metadata
- Authors
- Rabiee, F.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Nutrition Society
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2004-11
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 655-660
- ISSN
- 0029-6651 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-2719
- OpenAlex
- W2115325640
- Cited by
- 2,020
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 10.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Focus-group interview and data analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1079/pns2004399
- The paper
- Rabiee, F. (2004). Focus-group interview and data analysis. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. https://doi.org/10.1079/pns2004399
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.