Suppr超能文献

健康研究中焦点小组参与者的招募:一项元研究

Recruiting participants for focus groups in health research: a meta-research study.

作者信息

Lander Jonas, Wallraf Simon, Pieper Dawid, Klawunn Ronny, Altawil Hala, Dierks Marie-Luise, John Cosima

机构信息

Hannover Medical School (MHH), Institute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Carl-Neuberg-Street 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.

Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Institute for Health Services and Health System Research, Rüdersdorf, Germany.

出版信息

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2025 Jan 14;25(1):9. doi: 10.1186/s12874-025-02464-x.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Focus groups (FGs) are an established method in health research to capture a full range of different perspectives on a particular research question. The extent to which they are effective depends, not least, on the composition of the participants. This study aimed to investigate how published FG studies plan and conduct the recruitment of study participants. We looked at what kind of information is reported about recruitment practices and what this reveals about the comprehensiveness of the actual recruitment plans and practices.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of FG studies in PubMed and Web of Science published between 2018 and 2024, and included n = 80 eligible publications in the analysis. We used a text extraction sheet to collect all relevant recruitment information from each study. We then coded the extracted text passages and summarised the findings descriptively.

RESULTS

Nearly half (n = 38/80) of the studies were from the USA and Canada, many addressing issues related to diabetes, cancer, mental health and chronic diseases. For recruitment planning, 20% reported a specific sampling target, while 6% used existing studies or literature for organisational and content planning. A further 10% reported previous recruitment experience of the researchers. The studies varied in terms of number of participants (range = 7-202) and group size (range = 7-20). Recruitment occurred often in healthcare settings, rarely through digital channels and everyday places. FG participants were most commonly recruited by the research team (21%) or by health professionals (16%), with less collaboration with public organisations (10%) and little indication of the number of people involved (13%). A financial incentive for participants was used in 43% of cases, and 19% reported participatory approaches to plan and carry out recruitment. 65 studies (81%) reported a total of 58 limitations related to recruitment.

CONCLUSIONS

The reporting of recruitment often seems to be incomplete, and its performance lacking. Hence, guidelines and recruitment recommendations designed to assist researchers are not yet adequately serving their purpose. Researchers may benefit from more practical support, such as early training on key principles and options for effective recruitment strategies provided by institutions in their immediate professional environment, e.g. universities, faculties or scientific associations.

摘要

背景

焦点小组(FGs)是健康研究中一种既定的方法,用于获取对特定研究问题的全方位不同观点。它们的有效程度在很大程度上取决于参与者的构成。本研究旨在调查已发表的焦点小组研究如何规划和开展研究参与者的招募工作。我们考察了关于招募实践报告了哪些信息,以及这揭示了实际招募计划和实践的全面性如何。

方法

我们对2018年至2024年间在PubMed和科学网发表的焦点小组研究进行了系统检索,并将n = 80篇符合条件的出版物纳入分析。我们使用文本提取表从每项研究中收集所有相关的招募信息。然后我们对提取的文本段落进行编码,并对结果进行描述性总结。

结果

近一半(n = 38/80)的研究来自美国和加拿大,许多研究涉及与糖尿病、癌症、心理健康和慢性病相关的问题。在招募规划方面,20%的研究报告了具体的抽样目标,而6%的研究利用现有研究或文献进行组织和内容规划。另有10%的研究报告了研究人员以前的招募经验。这些研究在参与者数量(范围 = 7 - 202)和小组规模(范围 = 7 - 20)方面各不相同。招募通常在医疗机构进行,很少通过数字渠道和日常场所进行。焦点小组参与者最常见的招募方式是由研究团队(21%)或卫生专业人员(16%)进行,与公共组织的合作较少(10%),且很少表明参与人数(13%)。43%的案例中使用了对参与者的经济激励,19%的研究报告了采用参与式方法来规划和开展招募工作。65项研究(81%)共报告了58条与招募相关的局限性。

结论

招募情况的报告往往似乎不完整,其执行情况也欠佳。因此,旨在协助研究人员的指南和招募建议尚未充分发挥作用。研究人员可能会从更多实际支持中受益,例如由其直接专业环境中的机构,如大学、学院或科学协会,提供关于有效招募策略的关键原则和选项的早期培训。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/97ed/11730470/4e102c27c31b/12874_2025_2464_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验