4.3 Article

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

期刊

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/16094069231204767

关键词

men who have sex with men; WeChat; digital FGDs; qualitative research; participatory research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study implemented an online chat-based focus group discussion with men who have sex with men in China and evaluated its advantages, limitations, and feasibility in deepening community participation in STI research. The study found that online FGDs allowed for bidirectional communication and increased participant engagement. Many participants found online FGDs to be more convenient, less socially awkward, and more anonymous than in-person research.
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.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据