Suppr超能文献

在2021年成瘾研究同伴替代方案队列研究中使用在线方法招募和跟踪难以接触到的人群。

The use of online methods to recruit and follow a hard-to-reach population in the Peer Alternatives for Addiction Study 2021 Cohort.

作者信息

Zemore Sarah E, Delk Joanne, Mericle Amy A, Martinez Priscilla, Timko Christine

机构信息

Alcohol Research Group, Emeryville, California, USA.

Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.

出版信息

Alcohol Clin Exp Res (Hoboken). 2024 Sep;48(9):1795-1806. doi: 10.1111/acer.15413. Epub 2024 Aug 6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Although studies are increasingly adopting online protocols, few such studies in the addiction field have comprehensively described their data review procedures and successes in detecting low-quality/fraudulent data. The current study describes data collection protocols and outcomes of a large, longitudinal study (the PAL Study 2021) that implemented online design elements to study individuals seeking peer support for an alcohol use disorder.

METHODS

In 2021, the PAL Study collaborated with mutual-help group (MHG) partners and recovery-related organizations to recruit individuals attending a 12-step group, Women for Sobriety (WFS), LifeRing Secular Recovery, and/or SMART Recovery for an alcohol problem in-person and/or online in the prior 30 days. Participation was solicited both online and in-person. Individuals accessed baseline surveys via an open web link; follow-ups occurred at 6 and 12 months. Analyses included calculating the proportion of surveys eliminated in data quality review; comparing MHG subsamples to internal survey (benchmark) data for Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), WFS, LifeRing, and SMART; and examining response rates and attrition.

RESULTS

Although 93% of respondents who opened the baseline survey completed it, 87% of baseline surveys were eliminated in data quality review (final N = 531). Nonetheless, cleaned MHG subsamples were generally similar to benchmark samples on gender, age, race/ethnicity, and education. Follow-up rates for the cleaned sample were 88% (6 months) and 85% (12 months). Analyses revealed some differences in attrition by gender, primary MHG, and lifetime drug problems, but there was no evidence of greater attrition among those in earlier/less stable recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Study methods appear to have produced a valid, largely representative sample of the hard-to-reach target population that was successfully followed across 12 months. However, given the high survey elimination rate and need for extensive data review, we recommend that researchers avoid open-link designs and include comprehensive data review when incorporating online design elements.

摘要

背景

尽管越来越多的研究采用在线方案,但成瘾领域中很少有此类研究全面描述其数据审查程序以及在检测低质量/欺诈性数据方面的成效。本研究描述了一项大型纵向研究(2021年PAL研究)的数据收集方案和结果,该研究采用在线设计元素来研究寻求酒精使用障碍同伴支持的个体。

方法

2021年,PAL研究与互助小组(MHG)合作伙伴及康复相关组织合作,招募在过去30天内亲自或在线参加过12步小组、戒酒女性组织(WFS)、无教派戒酒康复组织或SMART戒酒康复组织以解决酒精问题的个体。通过线上和线下两种方式进行招募。个体通过开放的网页链接访问基线调查;随访在6个月和12个月时进行。分析内容包括计算在数据质量审查中被排除的调查比例;将MHG子样本与戒酒互助会(AA)、WFS、无教派戒酒康复组织和SMART的内部调查(基准)数据进行比较;以及检查应答率和失访情况。

结果

尽管93%打开基线调查的受访者完成了调查,但在数据质量审查中87%的基线调查被排除(最终样本量N = 531)。尽管如此,经过清理的MHG子样本在性别、年龄、种族/民族和教育程度方面通常与基准样本相似。清理后样本的随访率分别为88%(6个月)和85%(12个月)。分析显示,在失访情况上存在性别、主要MHG和终身药物问题方面的一些差异,但没有证据表明处于早期/恢复不太稳定阶段的个体失访情况更严重。

结论

研究方法似乎产生了一个有效且在很大程度上具有代表性的难以接触到的目标人群样本,并在12个月内成功进行了跟踪。然而,鉴于调查排除率高以及需要进行广泛的数据审查,我们建议研究人员避免使用开放链接设计,并在纳入在线设计元素时进行全面的数据审查。

相似文献

1
The use of online methods to recruit and follow a hard-to-reach population in the Peer Alternatives for Addiction Study 2021 Cohort.
Alcohol Clin Exp Res (Hoboken). 2024 Sep;48(9):1795-1806. doi: 10.1111/acer.15413. Epub 2024 Aug 6.
3
Mode of mutual-help group attendance: Predictors and outcomes in a US national longitudinal survey of adults with lifetime alcohol use disorder.
J Subst Use Addict Treat. 2024 Sep;164:209395. doi: 10.1016/j.josat.2024.209395. Epub 2024 May 11.
5
Home treatment for mental health problems: a systematic review.
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(15):1-139. doi: 10.3310/hta5150.
6
Psychological therapies for post-traumatic stress disorder and comorbid substance use disorder.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 4;4(4):CD010204. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010204.pub2.
8
Comparison of self-administered survey questionnaire responses collected using mobile apps versus other methods.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jul 27;2015(7):MR000042. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000042.pub2.
9
Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Nov 17;11(11):CD010216. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010216.pub7.

本文引用的文献

1
Who affiliates with SMART recovery? A comparison of individuals attending SMART recovery, alcoholics anonymous, both, or neither.
Alcohol Clin Exp Res (Hoboken). 2023 Oct;47(10):1926-1942. doi: 10.1111/acer.15164. Epub 2023 Oct 8.
2
Identifying and preventing fraudulent responses in online public health surveys: Lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic.
PLOS Glob Public Health. 2023 Aug 23;3(8):e0001452. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001452. eCollection 2023.
4
Careless responding in crowdsourced alcohol research: A systematic review and meta-analysis of practices and prevalence.
Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2022 Aug;30(4):381-399. doi: 10.1037/pha0000546. Epub 2022 Feb 7.
8
On the efficacy of online drug surveys during the time of COVID-19.
Subst Abus. 2020;41(3):283-285. doi: 10.1080/08897077.2020.1784362.
10
Out damn bot, out: Recruiting real people into substance use studies on the internet.
Subst Abus. 2020;41(1):3-5. doi: 10.1080/08897077.2019.1691131. Epub 2019 Dec 10.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验