How do Patients, Politicians, Physiotherapists and Other Health Professionals View Physiotherapy Research in Switzerland? A Qualitative Study
12
Citation
36
Reference
10
Related Paper
Citation Trend
Abstract:
Abstract Background Since 2002, the professional education for Swiss physiotherapists has been upgraded to a tertiary educational level. With this change, the need for research related to professional practice has become more salient. The elaboration of research priorities is seen as a possible way to determine the profession's needs, to help coordinate research collaborations and to address expectations regarding physiotherapy. There is still limited evidence about stakeholders' views with regard to physiotherapy research. The objective of this study was to investigate key stakeholders' opinions about research in physiotherapy in Switzerland. Methods Focus groups with patients, health professionals, researchers and representatives of public health organizations were conducted, and semi‐structured interviews were conducted with politicians, health insurers and medical doctors from three linguistic regions in Switzerland. An interview guide was elaborated. Data were transcribed and analysed using inductive content analysis (Atlas‐ti 6®). Results Eighteen focus groups and 23 interviews/written commentaries included 134 participants with various research experiences and from different settings. Fourteen categories were defined reflecting three themes: identity, interdisciplinarity and visibility. Stakeholders had positive views about the profession and perceived physiotherapists' important role now and in the future. Yet, they also felt that physiotherapy was not sufficiently recognized in society and not visible enough. A stronger professional identity would be key to enhancing interdisciplinary work. Conclusions Results of this qualitative study provide insights into key aspects for moving the physiotherapy profession forward. Identity is at the heart of physiotherapy, not necessarily in terms of research priorities but in the definition of domains of competence and future positioning. Identity is also tightly connected to Interdisciplinarity as this might threaten the existence of the profession. Stakeholders outside the profession insist on the importance of visibility. The results of this study can help stakeholders reflect on the future of physiotherapy and elaborate research priorities. © 2013 The Authors. Physiotherapy Research International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.This paper examines the use of a qualitative research method, the focus group technique, as an option for obtaining perceptual data. Potential HOPE 3 program participants were engaged in a focus group setting to determine the feasibility of this major housing initiative for homeownership. The basics of qualitative research in general, the results obtainable from the use of qualitative research, the process involved in utilizing the focus group technique, and the methodology and results of an actual session using the focus group technique are presented. The information collected is presented expressly to illustrate the focus group technique, which allows possible controversial topics to be discussed in an open and positive manner. The scenario also provides confidentiality for the sponsoring agencies, organizations, and participating households. The focus group technique proved to be an excellent technique for assessing attitudes, preferences, and housing needs in a community that traditionally has had poor participant response to requests for public input. The focus group session presented opportunities to increase the understanding of programmatic conflicts, gain feedback from first-time users of new initiatives, further outreach efforts, and assess potential conflicts that might arise in the implementation process of the HOPE 3 program.
Outreach
Qualitative property
Cite
Citations (2)
Qualitative analysis
Qualitative property
Cite
Citations (1)
ABSTRACT A qualitative research offers insights into social, emotional and experimental phenomena. Unlike quantitative study, no structured questionnaire is involved in the data collection. Instead, series of semi-structured or unstructured interviews are conducted. Interview is one of the commonest methods of data collection used in qualitative study. It can be in the form of in-depth interview or focus group discussion (FGD). The moderator plays a crucial role in ensuring the success of the interviews conducted and the quality of information gained. This paper gives an overview on the two most common methods of data collection used in qualitative research: In-depth interviews and focus group discussion. Keywords: Interviews, Qualitative research, In-depth, Focus Group Discussion
Moderation
Qualitative property
Semi-structured interview
Cite
Citations (17)
The focus group interview, an increasingly popular method in qualitative research, is used to obtain information that is highly accurate and relevant through a dynamic group interactive technique. Focus groups are used to gather ideas, opinions, perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs based on participants experiences in a defined area of interest. Focus groups can be used during the preliminary or exploratory stage of a study; during the course of a study (e.g., to develop or evaluate a particular / interesting program of activities); or after a program has been completed (e.g., to assess impact or generate further avenues of research). Focus group interviews can be used either as a method in their own right or as a complement to other methods, especially to check triangulation and validity. While our study concluded that focus group interviews are an "easy and cost efficient" method to collect quality data, validity and relationship issues between focus group data and other data must be determined and considered in the results. This article introduces the background, definitions, focus group process, participants, interview guidelines, moderator responsibilities, and data collection and analysis related to the focus group methodology.
Moderation
Exploratory research
Cite
Citations (8)
Focus groups are becoming increasingly popular in research, especially in parent and child research. Focus group interviews allow participants to tell their own stories, express their opinions, and even draw pictures without having to adhere to a strict sequence of questions. This method is very suitable for collecting data from children, youths, and parents. However, focus group interviews must be carefully planned and conducted. The literature on focus group interviews with adult participants is extensive, but there are no current summaries of the most important issues to consider when conducting focus group interviews with children, youths, or parents. This article outlines the use of focus groups in child, youth, and parent research and the important factors to be considered when planning, conducting, and analyzing focus groups with children, youths, or parents.
Cite
Citations (204)
Abstract This chapter discusses the collection and analysis of data obtained through focus group interviews. Building off earlier discussions of individual qualitative interviewing, the chapter discusses the methodological, theoretical, and logistical issues connected with conducting focus group interviews. These include such items as the different role played by the interviewer in a focus group interview as opposed to an individual interview, group dynamics, and issues of confidentiality. The chapter discusses research in music education that has employed focus group interviews, proposes ways in which focus group interviews may be used in the future, and discusses the emerging potential of technology to impact focus group interviews.
Interview
Cite
Citations (21)
Preface Acknowledgments Introduction: Attitudes, Assumptions, and Caveats The Urge to Synthesize Conceiving the Qualitative Research Synthesis Study Searching For and Retrieving Qualitative Research Reports Appraising Reports of Qualitative Studies Classifying the Findings in Qualitative Research Reports Synthesizing Qualitative Research Findings: Qualitative Metasummary Synthesizing Qualitative Research Findings: Qualitative Metasynthesis Optimizing the Validity of Qualitative Research Synthesis Studies Presenting Syntheses of Qualitative Research Findings Appendix: Reports in the Qualitative Metasynthesis Project Index
Qualitative analysis
Qualitative property
Cite
Citations (881)
Focus group interviews have been used extensively in health services program planning, health education, and curriculum planning. However, with the exception of a few reports describing the use of focus groups for a basic science course evaluation and a clerkship's impact on medical students, the potential of focus groups as a tool for curriculum evaluation has not been explored. Focus groups are a valid stand-alone evaluation process, but they are most often used in combination with other quantitative and qualitative methods. Focus groups rely heavily on group interaction, combining elements of individual interviews and participant observation. This article compares the focus group interview with both quantitative and qualitative methods; discusses when to use focus group interviews; outlines a protocol for conducting focus groups, including a comparison of various styles of qualitative data analysis; and offers a case study, in which focus groups evaluated the effectiveness of a pilot preclinical curriculum.
Qualitative property
Qualitative analysis
Cite
Citations (21)
The intent of this paper is to present an overview of focus group research methodology. The purpose of the exploratory and qualitative focus study was to investigate the status of dental hygiene as a profession. Information was gathered from four self-facilitating focus groups: first year dental hygiene students comprised the first group and the other three focus groups were comprised of practising dental hygienists. Criteria for defining a profession was established by the first focus group; further discussion from the other three focus groups was categorized, and if needed, a new category was designated.
Exploratory research
Cite
Citations (0)
ABSTRACT Two common methods of collecting qualitative data are the in-depth interview and the focus group. This study compared the two interview methods on four criteria: (1) number of unique factors generated, (2) time requirements, (3) relative cost, and (4) ease of data collection. Both interview methods discussed the topic “What factors influence your food choices.” Participants were 18 to 24 year old Anglo and Hispanic college women. Eight focus groups and twenty-eight in-depth interviews were completed. Focus groups required approximately half the time, cost half as much and yielded more factors. Focus groups were more difficult to schedule but easier to conduct. KEYWORDS: Focus GroupsInterviewsFood PreferencesHispanics
Qualitative property
Cite
Citations (8)