The Formative Phase of the Intervention Research Framework: Target Group Input

Chapter

Abstract

This chapter is the third of four chapters providing detail about the Formative or Development phase of the Intervention Research Framework. This chapter discusses the critical aspect of target group input into intervention development. Methods for obtaining information from the target group are provided, with particular attention to focus group and in-depth interview methodologies including: when to use a particular method; how to use the methodology; developing an interview schedule; obtaining saturation in data; and methods for analysing data to maintain an ‘authentic voice’. This chapter then describes how to utilise findings from the systematic literature review, expert review and target group input into intervention development. Finally this chapter provides a brief overview of the methodology used to incorporate target group input during the development of the SHAHRP research intervention.

 Objectives: By the end of this chapter readers will be able to:
  • Identify how researchers can involve primary target groups (young people), secondary target groups (implementers, policy makers, professional organisations) in the Formative phase of Intervention Research

  • Describe the benefits of involving primary and secondary target groups in research intervention development

  • Understand the process of planning, conducting and analysing focus groups

  • Understand the process of planning, conducting and analysing in-depth interviews

  • Identify when it is appropriate to use focus groups or in-depth interviews in the Formative phase of Intervention Research

  • Describe how to utilise findings from literature review, expert review, target group discussions, and educational expertise into intervention development and design

Keywords

Target Group Focus groups In-depth interviews 

References

  1. 1.
    Christensen C. The role of innovation. TechnolRev. 2002;105(5):32–8.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Thomke S. Experimentation matters: unlocking the potential of new technologies for innovation. USA: Harvard Bussiness School Press; 2003.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    McBride N, Farringdon F, Meuleners L, Midford R. School health and alcohol harm reduction project. Intervention development and research procedures: Monograph 59. National Drug Research Institute: Perth; 2006.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shedlin M, Schreiber J. Using focus groups in drug abuse and HIV/AIDS research. In: Lambert E, Ashery R, Needle R, editors. Qualitative methods in drug absue and HIV research National Institute of Health Research Monograph 157. United States Department of Health and Human Services: Rockville, USA; 1995.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kvale S. Inter views, an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 1996.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Windsor R, Baranowski T, Clark, Cutter G. Evaluation of health promotion, health education and disease prevention programs. Mountain View, California: Mayfield Publishing Company; 1994.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kvale S, Brinkmann S. Inter views: learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Log Angeles: Sage 3010723 KVA. 2009.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Denzin N, Lincoln Y. The landscape of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 1998.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    McKay M, McBride N, Sumnall H, Cole J. Reducing the harm from adolescent alcohol consumption: results from an adapted version of SHAHRP in Northern Ireland. J Substance Use. 2012; Early Online:1–24.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    National Drug Research Institute. School health and alcohol harm reduction project. Unpublished focus group results. National Drug Research Institute, Curtin University: Perth; 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Health Sciences, National Drug Research InstituteCurtin UniversityPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations