Capturing Public Opinion on Public Health Topics: A Comparison of Experiences from a Systematic Review, Focus Group Study, and Analysis of Online, User-Generated Content.
Capturing Public Opinion on Public Health Topics: A Comparison of Experiences from a Systematic Review, Focus Group Study, and Analysis of Online, User-Generated Content.
复制标题
DOI：
10.3389/fpubh.2015.00200
复制
发表时间：
2015
影响因子：
5.2
通讯作者：
Adams JM
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Giles EL;Adams JM
收集公众对公共卫生主题的意见对于确保服务，政策和研究与公众的信仰和优先事项保持一致非常重要。可采用若干办法来收集公众意见。我们正在开展一项关于促进健康的财政激励干预措施的有效性和可接受性的工作方案。我们收集了公众对金融激励措施的意见，使用三种方法：系统性回顾，焦点小组研究，以及分析在线用户对新闻媒体报道的评论。在这篇简短的社论式文章中，我们比较和对比了我们使用这三种方法的经验。每一种方法都有其优点和缺点。其优势包括为系统评价定制研究问题，在焦点小组中探索答案，以及使用在线用户生成内容聚合大型数据集的能力。然而，缺点包括需要更新系统性评论、参与者符合焦点小组中的主导观点，以及在分析用户生成的在线内容期间无法收集受访者特征。也就是说，对用户生成的在线内容进行分析提供了额外的时间和资源优势，我们发现它与通过更传统的方法（如系统评价和焦点小组）获得的结果相似。收集公众对公共卫生问题意见的方法有很多。公共卫生研究人员、政策制定者和从业人员应选择适合其目标的方法。分析用户生成的在线内容，特别是在新闻媒体报道的背景下，可能是更传统方法的一种更快、更便宜的替代方法，而不会影响所收集意见的广度。
Capturing public opinion toward public health topics is important to ensure that services, policy, and research are aligned with the beliefs and priorities of the general public. A number of approaches can be used to capture public opinion. We are conducting a program of work on the effectiveness and acceptability of health promoting financial incentive interventions. We have captured public opinion on financial incentive interventions using three methods: a systematic review, focus group study, and analysis of online user-generated comments to news media reports. In this short editorial-style piece, we compare and contrast our experiences with these three methods. Each of these methods had their advantages and disadvantages. Advantages include tailoring of the research question for systematic reviews, probing of answers during focus groups, and the ability to aggregate a large data set using online user-generated content. However, disadvantages include needing to update systematic reviews, participants conforming to a dominant perspective in focus groups, and being unable to collect respondent characteristics during analysis of user-generated online content. That said, analysis of user-generated online content offers additional time and resource advantages, and we found it elicited similar findings to those obtained via more traditional methods, such as systematic reviews and focus groups. A number of methods for capturing public opinions on public health topics are available. Public health researchers, policy makers, and practitioners should choose methods appropriate to their aims. Analysis of user-generated online content, especially in the context of news media reports, may be a quicker and cheaper alternative to more traditional methods, without compromising on the breadth of opinions captured.