HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH METHODS IN PHARMACY: Focus groups and observation studies

Author:

Smith Felicity1

Affiliation:

1. Centre for Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy, University of London, 29/39 Brunswick Square, London, England WC1N 1AX

Abstract

AbstractThis paper reviews research undertaken in pharmacy practice and related settings employing focus groups and observation methods. The aim of the review is to identify the main methodological considerations of these approaches to enable pharmacy practice researchers to benefit from the experiences of their colleagues when conducting their own research. The paper is in two parts. Focus groups have become increasingly prominent in pharmacy practice and health services research. They are an attractive and effective alternative to individual qualitative interviews for particular problems in pharmacy research. In this paper, the use of focus groups by researchers in pharmacy practice and related settings is reviewed. Observation studies have been applied widely to address many research questions. They are a valuable method of obtaining data, documenting actual events and activities rather than relying on self-reports of behaviours and events. Observation methods have been used both as a sole method for a research study and in combination with other methods. In the pharmacy practice literature there are examples of participant and non-participant observation studies and both quantitative and qualitative approaches. Through the experiences of pharmacy practice researchers, the methodological and ethical issues that these studies present are identified and ways in which they have been addressed are explored.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy,Pharmaceutical Science,Pharmacy

Reference84 articles.

1. Pharmacy in a New Age: Council improves information management strategy for pharmacy;Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain;Pharm J,1997

2. Using focus groups;Barbour;Family Pract,1995

3. Can raters consistently evaluate the content of focus groups;Weinberger;Soc Sci Med,1998

Cited by 18 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3