...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Health Services Research >Cost and feasibility: an exploratory case study comparing use of a literature review method with questionnaires, interviews and focus groups to identify barriers for a behaviour–change intervention
【24h】

Cost and feasibility: an exploratory case study comparing use of a literature review method with questionnaires, interviews and focus groups to identify barriers for a behaviour–change intervention

机译:成本和可行性:探索性案例研究比较了文献综述方法与问卷调查,访谈和焦点小组的使用,以确定行为变更干预的障碍

获取原文

摘要

Background It is often recommended that behaviour-change interventions be tailored to barriers. There is a scarcity of research into the best method of barrier identification, although combining methods has been suggested to be beneficial. This paper compares the feasibility and costs of three different methods of barrier identification used in three implementation projects conducted in primary care. Methods Underpinned by a theory-base, project one used a questionnaire and interviews; project two used a single focus group and questionnaire, and project three used a literature review of published barriers. The feasibility of each project, as experienced by the research team, and labour costs are summarised. Results The literature review of published barriers was the least costly and most feasible method, being quick to conduct and avoiding the challenges of recruitment experienced when using interviews or a questionnaire. The feasibility of using questionnaires was further reduced by the time taken to develop the instruments. Conducting a single focus group was also found to be a more feasible method, taking less time than interviews to collect and analyse the barriers. Conclusions Considering the ease of recruitment, time required and cost of the different methods to collect barriers is crucial at the start of implementation studies. The literature review method is the least costly and most feasible method. Use of a single focus group was found to be more feasible than conducting individual interviews or administering a questionnaire, with less recruitment challenges experienced, and quicker data collection. Future research would benefit from comparing the robustness of the methods in terms of the comprehensiveness of barriers identified.
机译:背景技术通常建议对障碍定制行为变更干预。尽管已经建议结合方法是有益的,但是缺乏研究的最佳障碍识别方法。本文比较了在初级保健中进行的三个实施项目中使用的三种不同障碍识别方法的可行性和成本。方法由理论基础支撑,项目一体地使用问卷和访谈;项目两次使用单一的焦点组和问卷调查,项目三是对公布障碍的文献综述。总结了每个项目的可行性,如研究团队所经历,劳动力成本。结果出版障碍的文献综述是最昂贵的昂贵和最可行的方法,快速行动和避免使用访谈或调查问卷时招聘的挑战。开发仪器的时间进一步减少了使用问卷的可行性。还发现进行单一的焦点组是一种更可行的方法,比采访少收集和分析障碍的时间更少。结论考虑到易于招募,时间所需的时间和不同方法的成本在实施研究开始时至关重要。文献综述方法是最昂贵和最可行的方法。发现单一焦点小组的使用比进行个别访谈或管理调查问卷更可行,较少招聘挑战,更快的数据收集。未来的研究将受益于比较方法的稳健性,以确定所确定的障碍的全面性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号