Improving the use of focus group discussions in low income settings

Abstract Background The quality of data obtained through Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) is highly dependent on appropriate design and facilitation. In low-income settings steep power gradients between researcher and participants, as well as conversational norms, could reduce the ability of participa...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Pauline F. D. Scheelbeek, Yashua A. Hamza, Joanna Schellenberg, Zelee Hill
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2020-11-01
Series:BMC Medical Research Methodology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01168-8
id doaj-3af01f3fb11e4839af11e5ca1ff43694
record_format Article
spelling doaj-3af01f3fb11e4839af11e5ca1ff436942020-12-06T12:03:13ZengBMCBMC Medical Research Methodology1471-22882020-11-0120111010.1186/s12874-020-01168-8Improving the use of focus group discussions in low income settingsPauline F. D. Scheelbeek0Yashua A. Hamza1Joanna Schellenberg2Zelee Hill3Department of Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical MedicineChildcare & Wellness ClinicsDepartment of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene & Tropical MedicineUniversity College London, Institute for Global HealthAbstract Background The quality of data obtained through Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) is highly dependent on appropriate design and facilitation. In low-income settings steep power gradients between researcher and participants, as well as conversational norms, could reduce the ability of participants to voice personal opinions. Activity-oriented exercises have been suggested as a way overcoming these challenges, however little evidence exists - to date - on their use in low-income settings. We selected six exercises for use in Ethiopia and Nigeria and report our experiences. Methods The six exercises (picture sorting, associative pictures, picture ranking, decision trees, predictive story-telling and provocative statements) were used in 32 maternal and new-born care themed FGDs conducted in Amhara and Southern Nations Nationalities and People’s Regions (Ethiopia) and Gombe State (Nigeria). Six facilitators and two supervisors who used these exercises were interviewed about their experiences. FGD verbatim transcripts and interview notes were analysed to explore methodological effectiveness and respondents’ experience. All data were coded in NVIVO using a deductive coding frame. Results Facilitators and participants described the methods as ‘fun’ and ‘enjoyable’. The exercises yielded more in-depth and complete information than ‘normal’ FGDs, but facilitator’s probing skills and overall FGD group dynamics proved crucial in this success. Explaining and conducting the exercises increased FGD length. Data richness, participant reaction and understanding, and ease of facilitation varied by study site, exercise, and participant group. Overall, the exercises worked better in Nigeria than in Ethiopia. The provocative statement exercise was most difficult for participants to understand, the decision-tree most difficult to facilitate and the picture exercises most enjoyable. The story telling exercise took relatively little time, was well understood, yielded rich data and reduced social desirability bias. Discussion The majority of the exercises proved successful tools in yielding richer and less biased information from FGDs and were experienced as fun and engaging. Tailoring of the exercises, as well as thorough training and selection of the facilitators, were pivotal in this success. The difference in the two countries shows that adequate piloting and adaptation is crucial, and that some exercises may not be adaptable to all settings.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01168-8Focus group discussionsBiasQualitative data collectionLow-income settingsActivity-oriented exercises
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Pauline F. D. Scheelbeek
Yashua A. Hamza
Joanna Schellenberg
Zelee Hill
spellingShingle Pauline F. D. Scheelbeek
Yashua A. Hamza
Joanna Schellenberg
Zelee Hill
Improving the use of focus group discussions in low income settings
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Focus group discussions
Bias
Qualitative data collection
Low-income settings
Activity-oriented exercises
author_facet Pauline F. D. Scheelbeek
Yashua A. Hamza
Joanna Schellenberg
Zelee Hill
author_sort Pauline F. D. Scheelbeek
title Improving the use of focus group discussions in low income settings
title_short Improving the use of focus group discussions in low income settings
title_full Improving the use of focus group discussions in low income settings
title_fullStr Improving the use of focus group discussions in low income settings
title_full_unstemmed Improving the use of focus group discussions in low income settings
title_sort improving the use of focus group discussions in low income settings
publisher BMC
series BMC Medical Research Methodology
issn 1471-2288
publishDate 2020-11-01
description Abstract Background The quality of data obtained through Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) is highly dependent on appropriate design and facilitation. In low-income settings steep power gradients between researcher and participants, as well as conversational norms, could reduce the ability of participants to voice personal opinions. Activity-oriented exercises have been suggested as a way overcoming these challenges, however little evidence exists - to date - on their use in low-income settings. We selected six exercises for use in Ethiopia and Nigeria and report our experiences. Methods The six exercises (picture sorting, associative pictures, picture ranking, decision trees, predictive story-telling and provocative statements) were used in 32 maternal and new-born care themed FGDs conducted in Amhara and Southern Nations Nationalities and People’s Regions (Ethiopia) and Gombe State (Nigeria). Six facilitators and two supervisors who used these exercises were interviewed about their experiences. FGD verbatim transcripts and interview notes were analysed to explore methodological effectiveness and respondents’ experience. All data were coded in NVIVO using a deductive coding frame. Results Facilitators and participants described the methods as ‘fun’ and ‘enjoyable’. The exercises yielded more in-depth and complete information than ‘normal’ FGDs, but facilitator’s probing skills and overall FGD group dynamics proved crucial in this success. Explaining and conducting the exercises increased FGD length. Data richness, participant reaction and understanding, and ease of facilitation varied by study site, exercise, and participant group. Overall, the exercises worked better in Nigeria than in Ethiopia. The provocative statement exercise was most difficult for participants to understand, the decision-tree most difficult to facilitate and the picture exercises most enjoyable. The story telling exercise took relatively little time, was well understood, yielded rich data and reduced social desirability bias. Discussion The majority of the exercises proved successful tools in yielding richer and less biased information from FGDs and were experienced as fun and engaging. Tailoring of the exercises, as well as thorough training and selection of the facilitators, were pivotal in this success. The difference in the two countries shows that adequate piloting and adaptation is crucial, and that some exercises may not be adaptable to all settings.
topic Focus group discussions
Bias
Qualitative data collection
Low-income settings
Activity-oriented exercises
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01168-8
work_keys_str_mv AT paulinefdscheelbeek improvingtheuseoffocusgroupdiscussionsinlowincomesettings
AT yashuaahamza improvingtheuseoffocusgroupdiscussionsinlowincomesettings
AT joannaschellenberg improvingtheuseoffocusgroupdiscussionsinlowincomesettings
AT zeleehill improvingtheuseoffocusgroupdiscussionsinlowincomesettings
_version_ 1724399295643254784