IN THIS SECTION: 1.) BRIEF 2.) COMPREHENSIVE BRIEF TABLE OF CONTENTS: Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 2: Designing Qualitative Research Chapter 3: Ethical Issues Chapter 4: A Dramaturgical Look at Interviewing Chapter 5: Focus Group Interviewing Chapter 6: Ethnographic Field Strategies Chapter 7: Action Research Chapter 8: Unobtrusive Measures in Research Chapter 9: Social Historical Research and Oral Traditions Chapter 10: Case Studies Chapter 11: An Introduction to Content Analysis Chapter 12: Writing Research Papers: Sorting the Noodles from the Soup COMPREHENSIVE TABLE OF CONTENTS: Chapter 1: Introduction Quantitative Versus Qualitative Schools of Thought Use of Triangulation in Research Methodology Qualitative Strategies: Defining an Orientation From a Symbolic Interactionist Perspective Why Use Qualitative Methods? A Plan of Presentation Chapter 2: Designing Qualitative Research Theory and Concepts Ideas and Theory Reviewing the Literature Evaluating Web Sites Content versus Use Theory, Reality, and the Social World Framing Research Problems Operationalization and Conceptualization Designing Projects Data Collection and Organization Data Storage, Retrieval, and Analysis Dissemination Trying It Out Chapter 3: Ethical Issues Research Ethics in Historical Perspective From Guidelines to Law: Regulations on the Research Process Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) Ethical Codes Some Common Ethical Concerns in Behavioral Research New Areas for Ethical Concern: Cyberspace Informed Consent and Implied Consent Confidentiality and Anonymity Securing the Data Objectivity and Careful Research Design Trying It Out Chapter 4: A Dramaturgical Look at Interviewing Dramaturgy and Interviewing Types of Interviews The Data Collection Instrument Guideline Development Communicating Effectively A Few Common Problems in Question Formulation Pretesting the Schedule Long Versus Short Interviews Telephone Interviews Computer Assisted Interviewing Conducting an Interview: A Natural or an Unnatural Communication? The Dramaturgical Interview The Interviewer's Repertoire Know Your Audience Analyzing Data Obtained from the Dramaturgical Interview Trying It Out Chapter 5: Focus Group Interviewing What are Focus Groups? Working With a Group The Evolution of Focus Group Interviews Facilitating Focus Group Dynamics: How Focus Groups Work The Moderator's Guide Basic Ingredients in Focus Groups Analyzing Focus Group Data Confidentiality and Focus Group Interviews Recent Trends in Focus Groups: Online Focus Groups Trying It Out Chapter 6: Ethnographic Field Strategies Accessing a Field Setting: Getting In Reflectivity and Ethnography Critical Ethnography Becoming Invisible Other Dangers During Ethnographic Research Watching, Listening, and Learning How to Learn: What to Watch and Listen For Computers and Ethnography OnLine Ethnography Analyzing Ethnographic Data Other Analysis Strategies: Typologies, Sociograms, and Metaphors Disengaging: Getting Out Trying It Out Chapter 7: Action Research The Basics of Action Research Identifying the Research Question(s) Gathering the Information to Answer the Question(s) Analyzing and Interpreting the Information Sharing the Results with the Participants When to Use and When Not to Use Action Research The Action Researcher's Role Types of Action Research Photovoice and Action Research Action Research: A Reiteration Trying It Out Chapter 8: Unobtrusive Measures in Research Archival Strategies Physical Erosion and accretion: Human Traces as Data Sources Trying It Out Chapter 9: Social Historical Research and Oral Traditions What Is Historical Research? Life Histories and Social History What Are the Sources of Data for Historical Researchers? Doing Historiography: Tracing Written History as Data What Are Oral Histories? Trying It Out Chapter 10: Case Studies The Nature of Case Studies Theory and Case Studies The Individual Case Study Intrinsic, Instrumental, and Collective Case Studies Case Study Design Types Designing Case Studies The Scientific Benefit of Case Studies Case Studies of Organizations Case Studies of Communities Trying It Out Chapter 11: An Introduction to Content Analysis What is Content Analysis? Analysis of Qualitative Data Content Analysis as a Technique Content Analysis: Quantitative or Qualitative? Communication Components What to Count: Levels and Units of Analysis Category Development: Building Grounded Theory Discourse Analysis and Content Analysis Open Coding Coding Frames Stages in the Content Analysis Process Strengths and Weaknesses of the Content Analysis Process Computers and Qualitative Analysis Qualitative Research at the Speed of Light Trying It Out Chapter 12: Writing Research Papers: Sorting the Noodles from the Soup Plagiarism: What It Is, Why It's Bad, and How to Avoid It Identifying the Purpose of the Writing: Arranging the Noodles Delineating a Supportive Structure: Visual Signals for the Reader Terms and Conditions Presenting Research Material A Word About the Content of Papers and Articles Write It, Rewrite It, Then Write It Again! A Few Writing Hints A Final Note

https://ndl.ethernet.edu.et/bitstream/123456789/9791/1/40.pdf.pdf

Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences

This paper introduces focus group methodology, gives advice on group composition, running the groups, and analysing the results. Focus groups have advantages for researchers in the field of health and medicine: they do not discriminate against people who cannot read or write and they can encourage participation from people reluctant to be interviewed on their own or who feel they have nothing to say.

This is the fifth in a series of seven articles describing non-quantitative techniques and showing their value in health research

**FIGURE OMITTED**

Focus groups are a form of group interview that capitalises on communication between research participants in order to generate data. Although group interviews are often used simply as a quick and convenient way to collect data from several people simultaneously, focus groups explicitly use group interaction as part of the method. This means that instead of the researcher asking each person to respond to a question in turn, people are encouraged to talk to one another: asking questions, exchanging anecdotes and commenting on each other's experiences and points of view.1 The method is particularly useful for exploring people's knowledge and experiences and can be used to examine not only what people think but how they think and why they think that way.

Focus groups were originally used within communication studies to explore the effects of films and television programmes,2 and are a popular method for assessing health education messages and examining public understandings of illness and of health behaviours.3 4 5 6 7 They are widely used to examine people's experiences of disease and of health services.8 9 and are an effective technique for exploring the attitudes and needs of staff.10 11

The idea behind the focus group method is that group processes can help people to explore and …

Qualitative Research: Introducing focus groups

During the past 20 years there has been a dramatic increase in societal interest in preventing disability and death in the United States by changing individual behaviors linked to the risk of contracting chronic diseases. This renewed interest in health promotion and disease prevention has not been without its critics. Some critics have accused proponents of life-style interventions of promoting a victim-blaming ideology by neglecting the importance of social influences on health and disease. This article proposes an ecological model for health promotion which focuses attention on both individual and social environmental factors as targets for health promotion interventions. It addresses the importance of interventions directed at changing interpersonal, organizational, community, and public policy, factors which support and maintain unhealthy behaviors. The model assumes that appropriate changes in the social environment will produce changes in individuals, and that the support of individuals in the population is essential for implementing environmental changes.

An Ecological Perspective on Health Promotion Programs

Background
Decision aids are intended to help people participate in decisions that involve weighing the benefits and harms of treatment options often with scientific uncertainty.

Objectives
To assess the effects of decision aids for people facing treatment or screening decisions.

Search methods
For this update, we searched from 2009 to June 2012 in MEDLINE; CENTRAL; EMBASE; PsycINFO; and grey literature. Cumulatively, we have searched each database since its start date including CINAHL (to September 2008).

Selection criteria
We included published randomized controlled trials of decision aids, which are interventions designed to support patients' decision making by making explicit the decision, providing information about treatment or screening options and their associated outcomes, compared to usual care and/or alternative interventions. We excluded studies of participants making hypothetical decisions.

Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. The primary outcomes, based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), were:

A) 'choice made' attributes;

B) 'decision-making process' attributes.

Secondary outcomes were behavioral, health, and health-system effects. We pooled results using mean differences (MD) and relative risks (RR), applying a random-effects model.

Main results
This update includes 33 new studies for a total of 115 studies involving 34,444 participants. For risk of bias, selective outcome reporting and blinding of participants and personnel were mostly rated as unclear due to inadequate reporting. Based on 7 items, 8 of 115 studies had high risk of bias for 1 or 2 items each.

Of 115 included studies, 88 (76.5%) used at least one of the IPDAS effectiveness criteria: A) 'choice made' attributes criteria: knowledge scores (76 studies); accurate risk perceptions (25 studies); and informed value-based choice (20 studies); and B) 'decision-making process' attributes criteria: feeling informed (34 studies) and feeling clear about values (29 studies).

A) Criteria involving 'choice made' attributes:

Compared to usual care, decision aids increased knowledge (MD 13.34 out of 100; 95% confidence interval (CI) 11.17 to 15.51; n = 42). When more detailed decision aids were compared to simple decision aids, the relative improvement in knowledge was significant (MD 5.52 out of 100; 95% CI 3.90 to 7.15; n = 19). Exposure to a decision aid with expressed probabilities resulted in a higher proportion of people with accurate risk perceptions (RR 1.82; 95% CI 1.52 to 2.16; n = 19). Exposure to a decision aid with explicit values clarification resulted in a higher proportion of patients choosing an option congruent with their values (RR 1.51; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.96; n = 13).

B) Criteria involving 'decision-making process' attributes:

Decision aids compared to usual care interventions resulted in:

a) lower decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed (MD -7.26 of 100; 95% CI -9.73 to -4.78; n = 22) and feeling unclear about personal values (MD -6.09; 95% CI -8.50 to -3.67; n = 18);

b) reduced proportions of people who were passive in decision making (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.81; n = 14); and

c) reduced proportions of people who remained undecided post-intervention (RR 0.59; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.72; n = 18).

Decision aids appeared to have a positive effect on patient-practitioner communication in all nine studies that measured this outcome. For satisfaction with the decision (n = 20), decision-making process (n = 17), and/or preparation for decision making (n = 3), those exposed to a decision aid were either more satisfied, or there was no difference between the decision aid versus comparison interventions. No studies evaluated decision-making process attributes for helping patients to recognize that a decision needs to be made, or understanding that values affect the choice.

C) Secondary outcomes

Exposure to decision aids compared to usual care reduced the number of people of choosing major elective invasive surgery in favour of more conservative options (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.93; n = 15). Exposure to decision aids compared to usual care reduced the number of people choosing to have prostate-specific antigen screening (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.77 to 0.98; n = 9). When detailed compared to simple decision aids were used, fewer people chose menopausal hormone therapy (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.98; n = 3). For other decisions, the effect on choices was variable.

The effect of decision aids on length of consultation varied from 8 minutes shorter to 23 minutes longer (median 2.55 minutes longer) with 2 studies indicating statistically-significantly longer, 1 study shorter, and 6 studies reporting no difference in consultation length. Groups of patients receiving decision aids do not appear to differ from comparison groups in terms of anxiety (n = 30), general health outcomes (n = 11), and condition-specific health outcomes (n = 11). The effects of decision aids on other outcomes (adherence to the decision, costs/resource use) were inconclusive.

Authors' conclusions
There is high-quality evidence that decision aids compared to usual care improve people's knowledge regarding options, and reduce their decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed and unclear about their personal values. There is moderate-quality evidence that decision aids compared to usual care stimulate people to take a more active role in decision making, and improve accurate risk perceptions when probabilities are included in decision aids, compared to not being included. There is low-quality evidence that decision aids improve congruence between the chosen option and the patient's values.

New for this updated review is further evidence indicating more informed, values-based choices, and improved patient-practitioner communication. There is a variable effect of decision aids on length of consultation. Consistent with findings from the previous review, decision aids have a variable effect on choices. They reduce the number of people choosing discretionary surgery and have no apparent adverse effects on health outcomes or satisfaction. The effects on adherence with the chosen option, cost-effectiveness, use with lower literacy populations, and level of detail needed in decision aids need further evaluation. Little is known about the degree of detail that decision aids need in order to have a positive effect on attributes of the choice made, or the decision-making process.

/pdf/decision-aids-for-people-facing-health-treatment-or-1j1706q17l.pdf

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

Course Description In this course, we will explore the question of the actual and potential connections between democracy and education. Our focus of attention will be placed on a critical examination of democratic theory and its implications for the civic education roles and contributions of teachers, adult educators, community development practitioners, and community organizers. We will survey and deal critically with a range of competing conceptions of democracy, variously described as classical, republican, liberal, radical, marxist, neomarxist, pragmatist, feminist, populist, pluralist, postmodern, and/or participatory. Using narrative inquiry as a means for illuminating and interpreting contemporary practice, we will analyze the implications of different conceptions of democracy for the practical work of civic education.

Democracy and education.

The purpose of this article is to increase awareness about and stimulate interest in using focus group interviews, a qualitative research technique, to advance the state-of- the-art of education and learning about health. After a brief discussion of small group process in health education, features of focus group interviews are presented, and a theoretical framework for planning a focus group study is summarized. Then, litera ture describing traditional and health-related applications of focus group interviews is reviewed and a synthesis of methodological limitations and advantages of this tech nique is presented. Implications are discussed regarding: need for more inductive qualitative research in health education; utility of focus group interviews for research and for formative and summative evaluation of health education programs; appli cability of marketing research to understanding and influencing consumer behav ior, despite notable distinctions between educational initiatives and marketing; and need...

Focus Group Interview: An Underutilized Research Technique for Improving Theory and Practice in Health Education

OBJECTIVES: This article provides an introduction to the October 2011 special issue of the Journal of School Health on "Healthier Students Are Better Learners." METHODS: Literature was reviewed and synthesized to identify health problems affecting school-aged youth that are highly prevalent, disproportionately affect urban minority youth, directly and indirectly causally affect academic achievement, and can be feasibly and effectively addressed through school health programs and services. RESULTS: Based on these criteria, 7 educationally relevant health disparities were selected as strategic priorities to help close the achievement gap: (1) vision, (2) asthma, (3) teen pregnancy, (4) aggression and violence, (5) physical activity, (6) breakfast, and (7) inattention and hyperactivity. Research clearly shows that these health problems influence students' motivation and ability to learn. Disparities among urban minority youth are outlined, along with the causal pathways through which each adversely affects academic achievement, including sensory perceptions, cognition, school connectedness, absenteeism, and dropping out. Evidence-based approaches that schools can implement to address these problems are presented. These health problems and the causal pathways they influence have interactive and a synergistic effect, which is why they must be addressed collectively using a coordinated approach. CONCLUSIONS: No matter how well teachers are prepared to teach, no matter what accountability measures are put in place, no matter what governing structures are established for schools, educational progress will be profoundly limited if students are not motivated and able to learn. Particular health problems play a major role in limiting the motivation and ability to learn of urban minority youth. This is why reducing these disparities through a coordinated approach warrants validation as a cohesive school improvement initiative to close the achievement gap. Local, state, and national policies for implementing this recommendation are suggested. Language: en

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2011.00632.x

Healthier students are better learners: a missing link in school reforms to close the achievement gap.

Review and Analysis of Evaluation Measures Used in Nutrition Education Intervention Research

Monitoring the implementation of a program being evaluated can improve the interpretability of data collected and help evaluators to avoid committing a Type III error: evaluating a program that has not been adequately implemented. This article describes an evaluation that analyzed the implementation of a school health education curriculum, assessed cognitive learning outcomes attributable to the curriculum, and examined the relationship between classroom implementation and changes in students' knowledge. Five fifth-grade classes (n = 101) participated in the curriculum, and five classes (n = 84) served as a comparison group. Data collection procedures involved a pretest and posttest of all students' health-related knowledge, daily monitoring of classroom implementation by the five teachers participating, and questionnaires completed by principals and teachers. Analysis methods included descriptive statistics, parametric and nonparametric tests of significance, and qualitative assessment procedures. Results indicated that the curriculum had a positive effect on learning in students; curriculum implementation varied considerably among the five classes participating; teaching/learning activities that were most and least likely to be implemented could be identified and described; both teachers and principals perceived the program favorably; some health instruction was occurring in the comparison classes, so it was not appropriate to consider them as pure controls; and no statistically significant relationship between curriculum implementation and cognitive outcomes was observed. This study provides evidence of the need for and value of measuring implementation of programs being evaluated. Implications for developing implementation measures and the role of formative evaluation in health education practice are considered.

Avoiding Type III Errors in Health Education Program Evaluations: A Case Study

BACKGROUND
While it is a national priority to support the health and education of students, these sectors must better align, integrate, and collaborate to achieve this priority. This article summarizes the literature on the connection between health and academic achievement using the Whole School, Whole Community, and Whole Child (WSCC) framework as a way to address health-related barriers to learning.

METHODS
A literature review was conducted on the association between student health and academic achievement.

RESULTS
Most of the evidence examined the association between student health behaviors and academic achievement, with physical activity having the most published studies and consistent findings. The evidence supports the need for school health services by demonstrating the association between chronic conditions and decreased achievement. Safe and positive school environments were associated with improved health behaviors and achievement. Engaging families and community members in schools also had a positive effect on students' health and achievement.

CONCLUSIONS
Schools can improve the health and learning of students by supporting opportunities to learn about and practice healthy behaviors, providing school health services, creating safe and positive school environments, and engaging families and community. This evidence supports WSCC as a potential framework for achieving national educational and health goals.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/josh.12309

Charles E. Basch

Papers

Focus Group Interview: An Underutilized Research Technique for Improving Theory and Practice in Health Education

Healthier students are better learners: a missing link in school reforms to close the achievement gap.

Review and Analysis of Evaluation Measures Used in Nutrition Education Intervention Research

Avoiding Type III Errors in Health Education Program Evaluations: A Case Study

Critical Connections: Health and Academics.