RCAAP
metadata only
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
THE END OF TRADITIONAL FOCUS GROUPS? SCALING UP QUALITATIVE RESEARCH QUICK, YET MAINTAINING DEPTH OF DATA WITH LARGER SAMPLES
The key benefits of qualitative research are rich insights and thick data. However, some argue these come at the cost of small sample sizes and low generalisability of findings. With traditional FGDs (FGDs), this could be addressed by conducting multiple groups. However, this requires significant in
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Potentially Identifying Variables Reported in 100 Qualitative Health Research Articles: Implications for Data Sharing and Secondary Analysis.#221291
- What social representations build Chilean university health students on multimedia and multimodal writing?#686787
- Optimizing Openness in Human Participants Research: Harmonizing Standards for Consent Agreements and Data Management Plans to Empower the Reuse of Sensitive Scientific Data#939585
- Group-Based Intervention to Improve Mental Health and Adherence Among Youth Living With HIV in Low Resource Settings#1137585
- Encouraging Clinical Trial Participation Through Qualitative Study and Behavior Change Methodology.#288850
Record · ID 781799
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive