Audio computer assisted self interview and face to face interview modes in assessing response bias among STD clinic patients
Audio computer assisted self interview and face to face interview modes in assessing response bias among STD clinic patients
复制标题
DOI：
10.1136/sti.2004.013193
复制
发表时间：
2005-10-01
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Erbelding, EJ
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ghanem, KG;Hutton, HE;Erbelding, EJ
背景：音频计算机辅助自我访谈（ACASI）可以在确定敏感行为时最大限度地减少社会期望偏差。本研究的目的是描述与面对面访谈（FFI）相比，在公共性传播疾病（STD）诊所参与者中，ACASI报告风险行为的差异。研究设计：随机选择在马里兰州巴尔的摩一家性病公共诊所就诊的患者，依次进行ACASI格式的风险行为评估，然后由一名临床医生进行FFI，两种访谈方式都调查了性行为和药物使用行为。使用符号检验比较二元反应，使用Wilcoxon符号秩检验比较分类反应，以解释重复测量。结果：795名临床参与者中有671人（52%男性，平均年龄30岁，95%非裔美国人）同意参与。受试者肯定了敏感的性行为，如同性性接触（p = 0.012）、接受性直肠性接触（p< 0.001）、口生殖器接触（p< 0.001），以及在过去一个月里更多的性伴侣（p< 0.001）， ACASI患者比FFI患者更频繁。但是，参与者对使用非法药物或共用针头问题的回答没有差异。结论：在性病临床患者中，向临床医生报告敏感性危险行为的患者比报告非法药物使用行为的患者更容易受到社会期望偏差的影响。在性病诊所，性风险筛查是性病预防的重要组成部分，使用ACASI可能是一种比传统FFI更可靠的评估方法。
Background: Audio computer assisted self interview (ACASI) may minimise social desirability bias in the ascertainment of sensitive behaviours. The aim of this study was to describe the difference in reporting risk behaviour in ACASI compared to a face to face interview (FFI) among public sexually transmitted diseases ( STD) clinic attendees.Study design: Randomly selected patients attending a public STD clinic in Baltimore, Maryland, sequentially took an ACASI formatted risk behaviour assessment followed by an FFI conducted by a single clinician, with both interview modalities surveying sexual and drug use behaviours. Binary responses were compared using the sign test, and categorical responses were compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test to account for repeated measures.Results: 671 (52% men, mean age 30 years, 95% African American) of 795 clinic attendees screened consented to participate. Subjects affirmed sensitive sexual behaviours such as same sex contact ( p = 0.012), receptive rectal sexual exposure ( p< 0.001), orogenital contact ( p< 0.001), and a greater number of sex partners in the past month ( p< 0.001) more frequently with ACASI than with an FFI. However, there were no differences in participant responses to questions on use of illicit drugs or needle sharing.Conclusions: Among STD clinic patients, reporting of sensitive sexual risk behaviours to clinicians was much more susceptible to social desirability bias than was reporting of illegal drug use behaviours. In STD clinics where screening of sexual risk is an essential component of STD prevention, the use of ACASI may be a more reliable assessment method than traditional FFI.