BMC Public Health 2009, 9:258 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/9/258 were carried out in order to facilitate natural interaction, comparison and discussion between participants. Methods Participants Thirty one participants (18 women and 13 men) aged between 17 and 68 were recruited from Southern Eng- land. Criteria for recruitment were that participants were currently living with at least one other person and were fluent English speakers. Participants were recruited to the study using advertisements (paper-based and online) and snowballing techniques. Purposive sampling methods were used to ensure a diverse sample, including older peo- ple, people with and without children and people with varied living arrangements and relationship status (see Table 1 for a summary of participant characteristics). Design Semi-structured focus groups lasting between one to one and a half hours were conducted by a single group facili- tator (the first author). In total one interview and eight focus groups were conducted; each group contained between two and six participants. Group discussions with two people do not constitute an ideal focus group design; only two groups were this small. However, when more than two participants were not able to meet at a conven- ient time, or when any participant failed to attend an arranged meeting, data collection proceeded with the number of participants present to avoid losing potentially valuable data. Separate focus groups were conducted with participants who had children (two groups) and partici- pants who did not have children (six groups) as it was rea- soned that parents might have different responses toward infection control measures given their particular responsi- bilities and circumstances. Six of the focus groups were mixed gender, with one group of men and one group of women. The focus groups were fairly homogenous with respect to age. Procedure Approval for the study was granted by the University of Southampton Ethics Committee (study ID: 491) and Table 1: Summary of participant characteristics Characteristic Gender: female n (%) Age: M (SD), range Relationship to other members of the household: n (%) Living with spouse/partner Living with parent(s) and/or siblings Living with friend(s) and/or unrelated people Living with family relations Share a bedroom: Yes n (%) Possibility of sleeping in separate bedrooms in the event of a pandemic: yes n (%) Research Governance Office (reference: 5755). Data col- lection took place between May 2008 and July 2008. Writ- ten informed consent was obtained from all participants. A focus group schedule was used to guide the discussion, and a pilot interview (not included in the analysis) was undertaken to identify and rectify any problems with the schedule. The schedule first stimulated talk about percep- tions of cold and influenza transmission and prevention. Participants were invited to discuss their thoughts about how colds and 'flu are caught and spread between people. Stimulus materials were then used to prompt discussion of handwashing, social distancing and cough hygiene as measures of reducing the spread of infections within households in the context of non-pandemic colds and influenza. The recommended infection control measures (see Table 2) were developed by the second author, in conjunction with a team of medical experts (see Acknowl- edgements). Participants were invited to discuss situations where they would or would not implement the measures, whether they thought the measures might be effective, and their feelings about the measures. The infection control meas- ures were considered both in the event of someone else in the house becoming infected or if the participants them- selves became infected. This was followed by a discussion of current knowledge and feelings about pandemic influ- enza. A definition of pandemic flu adapted from the UK Department of Health website [35] was provided to par- ticipants as a stimulus card (see Additional file 1). The group ended with a second discussion of the same infec- tion control measures in the context of pandemic influ- enza. Neutral prompts were used to redirect or stimulate discussion where necessary. Data analysis The focus groups and interview were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Inductive thematic analysis was then used to identify recurring patterns within the data [36], incorporating some techniques from grounded the- ory [37]. The analysis was undertaken from a broadly real- ist epistemology, assuming that what participants say n = 31 18 (58) 30.32 (14.34), 17–68 12 (39) 11 (35) 7 (23) 1 (3) 13 (42) 31 (100) Page 3 of 11 (page number not for citation purposes)