A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Randomized Survey Modality to Assess Impact of Survey Modality on Demographic, Behavioral, and Psychosocial Measures among Men Who Have Sex with Men in Kenya.

内容摘要

ObjectivesWe assessed whether survey mode influenced reporting of sexual behaviors and psychosocial factors among men who have sex with men (MSM) in Kenya.MethodsIn cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from 493 MSM in Kisumu and Nairobi enrolled in a prospective cohort study, participants were randomized 1:1 to Computer-Assisted Personal Interview (CAPI) or Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interview (ACASI). We compared responses across survey modes using Poisson regression with robust variance, adjusting for socio-demographics.ResultsIn both sites, CAPI users more frequently reported sex with a female partner. In Kisumu, CAPI users were less likely to report receptive anal intercourse. In Nairobi, CAPI users were less likely to report food insecurity, transactional sex, and STI symptoms.ConclusionWhile most responses were similar across modes, ACASI prompted higher reporting of sensitive behaviors, highlighting added value for capturing stigmatized and sensitive information. Offering both methods may enhance data quality and respect participant preferences. Different ways of asking survey questions affect the answers given for sensitive and stigmatized behaviorsPlain Language SummaryWe wanted to know if the way surveys are given changes how men who have sex with men answer sensitive questions about their lives and behaviors. We surveyed 493 men, who were randomly assigned to either answer questions face-to-face with an interviewer (CAPI) or privately on a computer with audio support (ACASI). We found that men answering face-to-face were more likely to report having sex with women, but less likely to report certain behaviors and challenges, such as receptive anal sex, food insecurity, transactional sex, and STI symptoms. Overall, most answers were similar, but the computer based method encouraged more reporting of sensitive and stigmatized behaviors. We recommend offering both methods to improve data quality and give participants a choice in how they share information.