 This paper examines the current state of focus group sampling in health-related journals. It found that many papers lack sufficient reporting of sample sizes, and that the number of focus groups can vary widely. Some papers attempt to explain their choice of sample size, but most do not follow the principles of data saturation or grounded theory. Additionally, some papers appear to ignore these principles by selecting two larger sample size. This paper suggests that journals should require more rigorous reporting of focus group sampling, and that further research is needed to develop better guidelines for choosing appropriate sample sizes. This article was authored by Glenn Tunkler and Carlson Benedict.