Table 2.

Comparison of traditional, in-person focus group discussions with CMC^a focus group discussions and considerations for implementation of CMC focus groups.

Study component	Traditional, in-person focus group discussions	CMC focus group discussions	Considerations for CMC focus group discussions
Geographic distribution	Constrained to local setting	Can be conducted across geographic distance, pulling participants and staff across distances	Time differences
Scheduling	Requires mutually agreeable date, time, and location; additional time needed to travel to and from study site	Requires mutually agreeable date and time	Send reminder of upcoming discussion via email, call, or text Send clear instructions to access the call via phone or computer
Logistics	Requires sufficient space to facilitate a group discussion of 8-10 participants and additional staff Requires participants to travel to specified locations (with consideration for travel reimbursement, public transport, and safety)	Requires telephone or Internet access among participants and staff Requires consideration of where and how participants connect online or by phone in terms of safety and privacy	Clear instructions provided during telephone screening and sent via email with screenshots Utilize notetaker to help troubleshoot any connection challenges that participants experience
Description of focus groups	Generally understood by participants; often viewed as similar to support groups	Described as online focus groups, but less understood and potentially daunting for participants with lower technological literacy	Clarify that individuals can participate by logging in online (with or without video) or calling in via telephone
Data security	Focuses on security of audio recording and transcripts	Focuses on security of audio recording within the electronic system and transcripts	Continue to monitor platform for any changes to data security features
Privacy	Participants requested not to disclose their real names and use pseudonyms Participants may recognize each other from the community	Participants requested not to disclose their real names and use pseudonyms; participants given the option to turn their Web cameras on or off Participants may recognize each other from the online community	Host permissions on the back end allow staff to change the name of participants who fail to use pseudonyms
Rapport	Developed during screening, consent, and throughout the discussion	May be more limited due to impersonal conference call-style setting	The use of video by study staff allows participants to view the staff and facilitates building of rapport
Participant engagement	Facilitator observes body language to guide the conversation and attempts to engage participants who do not participate in the discussion	Body language is only visible for participants who elect to utilize their cameras, though facilitator attempts to engage participants who do not participate in the discussion	Facilitator may observe mood and emotion from participants’ tone of voice to guide the conversation
Incentives	Can be provided in person in physical or electronic format	Geographic distance requires use of electronic payment or gift card or mailing the physical gift card or check	Consider local preferences for cash, mailed debit cards, or electronic payment methods
Recording and transcription	Recording may be of poor quality if participants are seated far away from each other, if participants interrupt each other, or if only one microphone is positioned in the middle of a large space; cost of transcription may increase due to poor audio quality	Software provides optional recording; cost of transcription may increase due to feedback and poor connection	Remind participants of alternative method to connect if connection quality is poor
Cost	Cost associated with space, transport, refreshments, and participant incentives	Cost associated with Zoom subscription (US $10/month) and participant incentives	Consider participant access to phone and computer

^aCMC: computer-mediated communication.