Online Focus Group Discussions to Engage Stigmatized Populations in Qualitative Health Research: Lessons Learned

被引：0
|
作者：
Marley, Gifty [1 ]
Tan, Rayner Kay Jin [1 ]
Wang, Tong [1 ]
Li, Chunyan [2 ]
Byrne, Margaret E. [2 ]
Wu, Dan [3 ]
Wang, Cheng [4 ]
Tang, Weiming [5 ]
Ramaswamy, Rohit [6 ]
Luo, Danyang [1 ]
Sylvia, Sean S. [5 ]
Tucker, Joseph D. [3 ,5 ,7 ]
机构：
[1] Univ North Carolina Project China, Guangzhou, Peoples R China
[2] Univ N Carolina, Inst Global Hlth & Infect Dis, Chapel Hill, NC USA
[3] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Clin Res Dept, London, England
[4] Southern Med Univ, Dermatol Hosp, Guangzhou, Peoples R China
[5] Univ North Carolina Chapel Hill, Dept Med, Chapel Hill, NC USA
[6] Cincinnati Childrens Hosp Med Ctr, Cincinnati, OH USA
[7] Univ N Carolina, Bioinformat Bldg,130 Mason Farm Rd,2nd floor, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
来源：
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF QUALITATIVE METHODS | 2023年 / 22卷
关键词：
men who have sex with men; WeChat; digital FGDs; qualitative research; participatory research; COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT; MEN; SEX; CHINA; CHLAMYDIA; GONORRHEA; BARRIERS; PARTICIPATION;
D O I：
10.1177/16094069231204767
中图分类号：
C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号：
03 ; 0303 ;
摘要：
Community participation in research involving stigmatized populations has been sub-optimal, and digital tools could potentially increase participation in qualitative research. This study aims to describe the implementation of an online chat-based FGD (Focus Group Discussion) with men who have sex with men (MSM) in China as part of formative research for the PIONEER project, determine the advantages and limitations associated with the approach, and assess the feasibility of deepening community participation in STI research. Participants were involved in four days of asynchronous FGDs on sexually transmitted diseases and answered questions about the online FGD method. Online FGDs allowed us to deepen participant engagement through bidirectional communication channels. Data from online FGDs directly informed recruitment strategies and community participation for a clinical trial. Overall, 63% (29/46) of men who had never participated in offline LGBTQ + activities joined online FGDs. Many participants (89%, 41/46) noted that online FGDs were more convenient, less socially awkward, and more anonymous than in-person qualitative research. We highlighted potential risks as well as mitigation strategies when using online FGDs. Online FGDs were feasible among this group of sexual minorities and may be particularly useful in many cities where stigma limits in-person research participation.
引用
收藏
页数：12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Conducting Research with Stigmatized Populations: Practices, Challenges, and Lessons Learned
    Maestre, Juan F.
    Pater, Jessica
    Eikey, Elizabeth V.
    Jacobs, Maia
    Warner, Mark
    Marcu, Gabriela
    Yarosh, Svetlana
    Shih, Patrick C.
    [J]. COMPANION OF THE 2018 ACM CONFERENCE ON COMPUTER SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK AND SOCIAL COMPUTING (CSCW'18), 2018, : 385 - 392
  • [2] Asynchronous Online Focus Groups for Health Research: Case Study and Lessons Learned
    Gordon, Allegra R.
    Calzo, Jerel P.
    Eiduson, Rose
    Sharp, Kendall
    Silverstein, Scout
    Lopez, Ethan
    Thomson, Katharine
    Reisner, Sari L.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF QUALITATIVE METHODS, 2021, 20
  • [3] WHY MALES IN BANGLADESH DO NOT PARTICIPATE IN REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH: LESSONS LEARNED FROM FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS
    Shahjahan, M.
    Kabir, M.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL QUARTERLY OF COMMUNITY HEALTH EDUCATION, 2006, 26 (01) : 45 - 59
  • [4] Sensitive Health Topics With Underserved Patient Populations: Methodological Considerations for Online Focus Group Discussions
    Reisner, Sari L.
    Randazzo, Renee K.
    Hughto, Jaclyn M. White
    Peitzmeier, Sarah
    DuBois, L. Zachary
    Pardee, Dana J.
    Marrow, Elliot
    McLean, Sarah
    Potter, Jennifer
    [J]. QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH, 2018, 28 (10) : 1658 - 1673
  • [5] When is a focus group not a focus group? Use of online technology within qualitative research
    Williams, Julia
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF QUALITATIVE METHODS, 2011, 10 (04): : 527 - 527
  • [6] Unexpected benefits of and lessons learned from shifting to virtual focus group discussions in the BEECON trial
    Lindau, Helen
    Ramos-Gomez, Francisco
    Garza, Jeremiah
    Finlayson, Tracy
    Pareja, Morgan
    Liu, Jenny
    Gansky, Stuart
    [J]. BMC RESEARCH NOTES, 2022, 15 (01)
  • [7] Unexpected benefits of and lessons learned from shifting to virtual focus group discussions in the BEECON trial
    Helen Lindau
    Francisco Ramos-Gomez
    Jeremiah Garza
    Tracy Finlayson
    Morgan Pareja
    Jenny Liu
    Stuart Gansky
    [J]. BMC Research Notes, 15
  • [8] Lessons Learned Using Web Conference Technology for Online Focus Group Interviews
    Tuttas, Carol A.
    [J]. QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH, 2015, 25 (01) : 122 - 133
  • [9] Qualitative Research and Consumer Policy: Focus Group Discussions as a Form of Consumer Participation
    Heiskanen, Eva
    Jarvela, Katja
    Pulliainen, Annukka
    Saastamoinen, Mika
    Timonen, Paivi
    [J]. QUALITATIVE REPORT, 2008, 13 (02) : 152 - 172
  • [10] Focus group discussions in medical research
    M. Lakshman
    Maryann Charles
    Moumita Biswas
    Leena Sinha
    N. K. Arora
    [J]. The Indian Journal of Pediatrics, 2000, 67 (5) : 358 - 362
12345