Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by FARDY, H J.
Right arrow Articles by JEFFS, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by FARDY, H J.
Right arrow Articles by JEFFS, D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Family Practice Vol. 11, No. 3, 325-329
© Oxford University Press 1994

research-article

Focus Groups: a Method for Developing Consensus Guidelines in General Practice

H JOHN FARDY*, and DAVID JEFFS{dagger}

*Director, Illawarra General Practice Training Unit, Illawarra Area Health Service, Wollongong, NSW, Lecturer (conjoint) School of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales Sydney, NSW
{dagger}Illawarra Public Health Unit.Illawarra Area Health Service, Principal Fellow, Dept of Public Health and Nutrition, University of Wollongong Australia

Correspondence to: Dr H. John Fardy at GPTU, Shellharbour Hospital, PO Box 52, Shellharbour Square, NSW, 2329, Australia.

The measurement of quality in any clinical discipline depends, in part, on a comparison with an accepted standard. Currently, such standards do not exist for the management of many common clinical situations in Australian general practice. As part of the General Practice Evaluation Programme, a group of Illawarra general practitioners (GPs) selected ‘GP management of the menopause and asthma’ for in-depth study, and were able to arrive at a consensus on ‘principles of practice’ and ‘minimal acceptable care’ for these conditions through a series of focus (research) group meetings. However, the process by which these standards were derived was felt, of itself, to be a valuable means of: (i) reducing professional isolation; (ii) promoting quality assurance; (iii) introducing peer review; (iv) introducing clinical audit; and (v) providing meaningful and targeted continuing medical education appropriate to Australian general practice. This paper describes the focus group methodology used in this process.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Asia Pac J Public HealthHome page
K. Inoue, S. Matoba, Y. Sugita, and M. Okuno
A Comparative Study of Rural Clinics in Remote Islands and Inland Areas
Asia Pac J Public Health, January 1, 2000; 12(1): 22 - 26.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Int J Soc PsychiatryHome page
R. A. Powell, H. M. Single, and K. R. Lloyd
Focus Groups in Mental Health Research: Enhancing the Validity of User and Provider Questionnaires
International Journal of Social Psychiatry, January 1, 1996; 42(3): 193 - 206.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.