City Research Online

Abstract

Introduction

Social media is increasingly being used as a data source and for engagement, often without ethical approval1. Online focus groups are indicated as a suitable methodology for busy professionals and others2. However, little is known about whether such an approach would provide valuable information or reflect the advantages of an on-site focus group. Some UK Speech and Language Therapists (SLTs) use social media for a range of reasons which can include Twitter (now X) synchronous chats.

Methods

The researcher led an X chat focus group on 18/03, UK Swallowing Awareness Day 2020, via @ReSNetSLT handle following advertising via the @ReSNetSLT webpage and tweets/posts. This was an ethically approved stakeholder engagement project regarding clinical practice when working with people with neurodevelopmental conditions and dysphagia. The one-hour group had 4 questions and followed the handle’s standard chat methods. It aimed to gather data for inclusion within a research project proposal. Chat participants were regularly reminded that responses would be analysed unless they opted out, and of the option to provide demographic details and consent for quotation use. Following the chat participants who had not completed the optional demographic information were directly messaged, when possible, to remind them of the opt-out option. The chat was collated using Symplur software, as standard for @ReSNetSLT, downloaded and pseudoanonymised. The chat data e.g. participant numbers, demographic data (if provided) and engagement was analysed. This was compared to reported focus group methodology strengths and whether data assisted the proposal as planned.

Results

The chat was 5 days before the UK Covid lockdown. Twenty-four participants took part (n=4 @ReSNetSLT members supporting chat delivery). No participants chose to opt out and n=11 provided demographic data and consent for quotation use. Participants were predominately SLTs (n=10), n=1 support worker. Participants varied in length of experience of working with people with neurodevelopmental disabilities and dysphagia; 1 month-3 years: n=5, 3-10 years: n=3, 10 years plus: n=3. They also varied by client group age range; 0-1 years: n=2, Pre-school: n=3, School-age: n=4, Adults: n=7, with some working in more than one age group. The varied from multiple posts/re-posts to one only.

Discussion

Despite the pressures on health professionals just prior to Covid lockdown this 1-hour chat had greater attendance (n=24) than typical @ReSNetSLT groups (n=19) or onsite focus groups (n=6-12)1. It engaged a range of SLTs with a range of experience. Although synchronous, multiple conversations occurred simultaneously which had advantages, more data, but also potential disadvantages, discussions missed by some participants in the fast pace. Certain chat aspects were difficult to analysed e.g. re-tweet/post could indicate agreement, advertising the chat to others or other purposes. The data was able to be analysed qualitatively and was used within a successful research project funding proposal. An online synchronous focus group chat can provide novel and rich data from SLTs however with social media use constantly changing the best platform and handle may change over time.

Publication Type:	Poster
Additional Information:	Paper presented at the European Swallowing Disorders Congress, 25-27 Sep 2024,
Subjects:	H Social Sciences > HN Social history and conditions. Social problems. Social reform Q Science > QA Mathematics > QA75 Electronic computers. Computer science
Departments:	School of Health & Psychological Sciences School of Health & Psychological Sciences > Language & Communication Science
SWORD Depositor:	Symplectic Administrator

Export

Downloads