IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0231086.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A mixed methods investigation of implementation barriers and facilitators to a daily mobile phone sexual risk assessment for young women in Soweto, South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Janan J Dietrich
  • Stefanie Hornschuh
  • Mamakiri Khunwane
  • Lerato M Makhale
  • Kennedy Otwombe
  • Cecilia Morgan
  • Yunda Huang
  • Maria Lemos
  • Erica Lazarus
  • James G Kublin
  • Glenda E Gray
  • Fatima Laher
  • Michele Andrasik
  • on behalf of the HVTN 915 team

Abstract

Background: The HIV epidemiology in South Africa reveals stark age and gender disparities, with young women being the most vulnerable to HIV acquisition in 2017. Evaluation of HIV exposure is a challenge in HIV prevention research. Intermittent in-clinic interviewer-administered risk behaviour assessments are utilised but may be limited by social desirability and recall biases. We piloted a mobile phone application for daily self-report of sexual risk behaviour in fifty 18–25 year old women at risk of HIV infection enrolled in HIV Vaccine Trials Network 915 (HVTN 915) in Soweto, South Africa. Through a mixed-methods investigation, we explored barriers and facilitators to completing daily mobile phone surveys among HVTN 915 study participants and staff. Methods: We analysed quantitative data on barriers and facilitators to mobile phone study completion collected during the larger HVTN 915 study as well as two post-study focus group discussions (FGDs) with fifteen former participants with a median age of 24 years (IQR 23–25) and six individual in-depth interviews (IDIs) with HVTN 915 staff. FGDs and IDIs utilised semi-structured interview guides, were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and translated to English. After coding, thematic analysis was performed. Results: The main facilitator for daily mobile phone survey completion assessed across 336 follow-up visits for 49 participants was the daily short message system (SMS) reminders (93%, 312/336). Across 336 visits, 31/49 (63%) retained participants reported barriers to completion of daily mobile phone surveys: forgetting (20%, 12/49), being too busy (19%, 11/49) and the survey being an inconvenience (15%, 9/49). Five main themes were identified during the coding of IDIs and FGDs: (1) facilitators of mobile phone survey completion, such as daily SMS reminders and follow up calls for non-completers; (2) barriers to mobile phone survey completion, including partner, time-related and technical barriers; (3) power of incentives; (4) response bias in providing sensitive information, and (5) recommendations for future mobile phone based interventions. Conclusion: Despite our enthusiasm to use innovation to optimise sexual risk assessments, technical and practical solutions are required to improve implementation. We recommend further engagement with participants to optimise this approach and to further understand social desirability bias and study incentives in sexual risk reporting.

Suggested Citation

  • Janan J Dietrich & Stefanie Hornschuh & Mamakiri Khunwane & Lerato M Makhale & Kennedy Otwombe & Cecilia Morgan & Yunda Huang & Maria Lemos & Erica Lazarus & James G Kublin & Glenda E Gray & Fatima La, 2020. "A mixed methods investigation of implementation barriers and facilitators to a daily mobile phone sexual risk assessment for young women in Soweto, South Africa," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-20, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0231086
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231086
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0231086
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0231086&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0231086?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephanie B Linek & Benedikt Fecher & Sascha Friesike & Marcel Hebing, 2017. "Data sharing as social dilemma: Influence of the researcher’s personality," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-24, August.
    2. Tracy Jackson & Michael D Shields & Liam G Heaney & Marilyn Kendall & Christina J Pearce & Chi Yan Hui & Hilary Pinnock, 2017. "The impact of financial incentives on the implementation of asthma or diabetes self-management: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, November.
    3. Linek, Stephanie B. & Fecher, Benedikt & Friesike, Sascha & Hebing, Marcel, 2017. "Data sharing as social dilemma: Influence of the researcher’s personality," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12(8), pages 1-24.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. KWON Seokbeom & MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki, 2020. "Incentive or Disincentive for Disclosure of Research Data? A Large-Scale Empirical Analysis and Implications for Open Science Policy," Discussion papers 20058, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0231086. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.