Hall Eric William, Sanchez Travis H, Stein Aryeh D, Stephenson Rob, Zlotorzynska Maria, Sineath Robert Craig, Sullivan Patrick S
Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Hubert Department of Global Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States.
J Med Internet Res. 2017 Mar 6;19(3):e64. doi: 10.2196/jmir.6710.
Web-based surveys are increasingly used to capture data essential for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention research. However, there are challenges in ensuring the informed consent of Web-based research participants.
The aim of our study was to develop and assess the efficacy of alternative methods of administering informed consent in Web-based HIV research with men who have sex with men (MSM).
From July to September 2014, paid advertisements on Facebook were used to recruit adult MSM living in the United States for a Web-based survey about risk and preventive behaviors. Participants were randomized to one of the 4 methods of delivering informed consent: a professionally produced video, a study staff-produced video, a frequently asked questions (FAQs) text page, and a standard informed consent text page. Following the behavior survey, participants answered 15 questions about comprehension of consent information. Correct responses to each question were given a score of 1, for a total possible scale score of 15. General linear regression and post-hoc Tukey comparisons were used to assess difference (P<.001) in mean consent comprehension scores. A mediation analysis was used to examine the relationship between time spent on consent page and consent comprehension.
Of the 665 MSM participants who completed the comprehension questions, 24.2% (161/665) received the standard consent, 27.1% (180/665) received the FAQ consent, 26.8% (178/665) received the professional consent video, and 22.0% (146/665) received the staff video. The overall average consent comprehension score was 6.28 (SD=2.89). The average consent comprehension score differed significantly across consent type (P<.001), age (P=.04), race or ethnicity (P<.001), and highest level of education (P=.001). Compared with those who received the standard consent, comprehension was significantly higher for participants who received the professional video consent (score increase=1.79; 95% CI 1.02-2.55) and participants who received the staff video consent (score increase=1.79; 95% CI 0.99-2.59). There was no significant difference in comprehension for those who received the FAQ consent. Participants spent more time on the 2 video consents (staff video median time=117 seconds; professional video median time=115 seconds) than the FAQ (median=21 seconds) and standard consents (median=37 seconds). Mediation analysis showed that though time spent on the consent page was partially responsible for some of the differences in comprehension, the direct effects of the professional video (score increase=0.93; 95% CI 0.39-1.48) and the staff-produced video (score increase=0.99; 95% CI 0.42-1.56) were still significant.
Video-based consent methods improve consent comprehension of MSM participating in a Web-based HIV behavioral survey. This effect may be partially mediated through increased time spent reviewing the consent material; however, the video consent may still be superior to standard consent in improving participant comprehension of key study facts.
Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02139566; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02139566 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6oRnL261N).
基于网络的调查越来越多地用于获取人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV)预防研究所需的数据。然而,确保基于网络的研究参与者的知情同意存在挑战。
我们研究的目的是开发并评估在与男男性行为者(MSM)进行的基于网络的HIV研究中实施知情同意的替代方法的效果。
2014年7月至9月,利用脸书上的付费广告招募居住在美国的成年MSM参与一项关于风险和预防行为的网络调查。参与者被随机分配到4种提供知情同意的方法之一:专业制作的视频、研究人员制作的视频、常见问题(FAQ)文本页面和标准知情同意文本页面。在行为调查之后,参与者回答了15个关于同意信息理解的问题。对每个问题的正确回答得1分,总得分范围为0至15分。使用一般线性回归和事后Tukey比较来评估平均同意理解得分的差异(P<0.001)。采用中介分析来研究在同意页面上花费的时间与同意理解之间的关系。
在665名完成理解问题的MSM参与者中,24.2%(161/665)接受了标准同意,27.1%(180/665)接受了FAQ同意,26.8%(178/665)接受了专业同意视频,22.0%(146/665)接受了研究人员视频。总体平均同意理解得分为6.28(标准差=2.89)。同意理解得分在同意类型(P<0.001)、年龄(P=0.04)、种族或族裔(P<0.001)以及最高教育水平(P=0.001)之间存在显著差异。与接受标准同意的参与者相比,接受专业视频同意的参与者理解得分显著更高(得分增加=1.79;95%CI 1.02 - 2.55),接受研究人员视频同意的参与者理解得分也显著更高(得分增加=1.79;95%CI 0.99 - 2.59)。接受FAQ同意的参与者在理解方面没有显著差异。参与者在两个视频同意上花费的时间更多(研究人员视频中位数时间=117秒;专业视频中位数时间=115秒),而FAQ(中位数=21秒)和标准同意(中位数=37秒)花费时间较少。中介分析表明,虽然在同意页面上花费的时间部分导致了理解上的一些差异,但专业视频(得分增加=0.93;95%CI 0.39 - 1.48)和研究人员制作的视频(得分增加=0.99;95%CI 0.42 - 1.56)的直接影响仍然显著。
基于视频的同意方法提高了参与基于网络的HIV行为调查的MSM的同意理解。这种效果可能部分通过增加审查同意材料的时间来介导;然而,视频同意在提高参与者对关键研究事实的理解方面可能仍然优于标准同意。
Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02139566;https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02139566(由WebCite存档于http://www.webcitation.org/6oRnL261N)