The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Focus Groups
Abstract
This paper introduces focus group methodology and discusses its relevance to those researching health care provision. As a qualitative data collection technique, the focus group has advantages over other qualitative methods, such as the in-depth interview and nominal group technique. This paper highlights these advantages after providing guidelines on group composition, the management of group discussion and the process of analysing results.
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 methods for assessing health care.
Fitzpatrick, R., & Boulton, M. (1994) · Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1136/qshc.3.2.107 · Cited by 298
Cited by
How many focus groups are enough? Building an evidence base for nonprobability sample sizes
Guest, G., Namey, E., & McKenna, K. (2017) · Field Methods · doi:10.1177/1525822x16639015 · Cited by 1,752
What about N? A methodological study of sample-size reporting in focus group studies
Carlsen, B., & Glenton, C. (2011) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-11-26 · Cited by 670
Using 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
‘Best practice’ in focus group research: making sense of different views
Freeman, T. (2006) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.04043.x · Cited by 517
Beich, A. (2002) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.325.7369.870 · Cited by 285
Metadata
- Authors
- POWELL, R. A., & SINGLE, H. M.
- Venue
- International Journal for Quality in Health Care
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1996
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 499-504
- ISSN
- 1353-4505 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-3677
- OpenAlex
- W4250976518
- Cited by
- 701
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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 Groups. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/intqhc/8.5.499
- The paper
- POWELL, R. A., & SINGLE, H. M. (1996). Focus Groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/8.5.499
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.
