Objectives Focus groups used for data collection in health research are increasingly conducted online. In two multi-center health research projects, we applied available methodological instructions for synchronous online focus groups (SOFGs). We describe necessary changes and specifications regarding the planning (recruitment, technology, ethics, appointments) and conduct (group composition, moderation, interaction, didactics) to enhance knowledge about the planning and conduct of SOFGs. Results Recruiting online proved to be challenging and necessitated direct and analogue recruiting, too. To ensure participation, less digital and more individual formats may be offered, e.g. telephone calls. Explaining verbally the specifics of data protection and anonymity in an online setting can foster participants’ confidence to actively engage in the discussion. Two moderators, one moderating, one supporting technically, are advisable in SOFGs, however, due to limited nonverbal communication, roles and tasks need to be defined beforehand. Participant interaction is central to focus groups in general, but sometimes difficult to achieve online. Hence, smaller group size, sharing of personal information and moderators increased attention to individual reactions appeared helpful. Lastly, digital tools such as surveys and breakout rooms should be used with caution, as they easily inhibit interaction.

Background Parents of infants and young children may have specific health information needs and preferences, as they are responsible for their children's health. COVID‐19 posed many challenges for families, not least in terms of the constantly updated disease‐prevention guidelines. However, little is known about parents' experiences with this unprecedented situation, that is, how and where they seek, use and evaluate COVID‐19 (child)‐specific health information. We aimed to find out more about this to provide insights to health (information) providers when communicating pandemic information to parents. Methods We conducted semistructured telephone interviews (August to October 2020) with a purposively selected sample of 20 German‐speaking and 10 Arabic‐speaking parents of children up to 4 years old. Recruitment occurred through multiple channels, including childcare institutions and social media. Qualitative content analysis of the interview transcripts illustrates the main differences between the two groups. Results By the time the interviews were conducted (mid‐2020), some parents reported to seek information less actively or not at all, compared to the beginning of COVID‐19. German speakers frequently used Google to obtain information, whereas Arabic speakers mentioned social media (particularly Facebook) as a central source. However, medical providers were the most trusted source for child health. Though determining the credibility of online information was difficult for some parents, others, mostly German speakers (middle–high education), were aware of some author‐related criteria. When deciding on information use, parents often rely on their own judgement and gut instinct. Besides the necessity to disseminate information via multiple outlets to reach all parents, Arabic speakers desired audio‐visual and translation tools to facilitate understanding. Discussion and Public Conclusion Apart from education, language and knowledge of the health system and of the attributes of credible information may determine its quality and consequent decisions. There seems to be a considerable need to foster knowledge about reliable information sources, a greater understanding of the range of quality criteria and specific support for nonnative speakers, not least to better inform parents' decision‐making. Patient and Public Contribution A parent panel ( n = 7) contributed to gathering ideas regarding recruitment, discussing initial results and the choice of topics and questions for a second interview phase.

No abstract

Background Ensuring motivated and successful study participation is a key challenge in the design and conduct of health research studies. Previously, recruitment barriers and facilitators have been identified mainly from experience, and rarely based on theoretical approaches. We developed a framework of intentional and actional components of engaged participation in public health research studies (INTACT-RS), informed by psychological behavioral models. We aimed a) to identify precise indicators for each framework component and b) to better understand which components and decision processes are essential for study participants. Methods Within a multicenter research network, we applied various approaches to recruit parents of newborns, pediatricians, and midwives. All recruitment processes were documented from the perspective of both participants and researchers. We used different qualitative and quantitative data material, which we applied in a multistage process according to the basic principles of qualitative content analysis. Results INTACT-RS encompasses pre-intentional, intentional and actional phases with a total of n = 15 components covering all aspects of an individual’s involvement with a research study. During intention formation, an understanding of efforts and benefits, why participation is valuable beyond contributing to research, and how others perceive the study, were particularly important to (potential) participants. Subsequently (intentional phase), participants consider how and when participation is compatible with their own resources, ability and availability, and hence seek for close communication with, and flexibility and support from the research team. During and after (initial) participation (actional phase), participants’ assessment of whether expectations and interests have been met impact crucial further steps, especially the willingness to continue and to recommend participation to others. A strong topic-wise and or supportive participation interest as well as active, continuous exchange with the researchers appeared to be central determinants of study completion and data validity. Conclusions A theoretical framework is now available to plan and conduct recruitment of different target groups, which accounts for essential motivational and volitional decision-making processes. Based on empirically specified constructs, possible barriers can be addressed even before the initial recruitment process. Therefore, recommendations for scientific practice have been formulated.