Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20161771›Full record

ArticlePloS one2010

Perceptions of audio computer-assisted self-interviewing (ACASI) among women in an HIV-positive prevention program.

Larissa J Estes, Linda E Lloyd, Michelle Teti, Sheela Raja, Lisa Bowleg, Kristi L Allgood, Nancy Glick

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Larissa J EstesSchool of Public Health, University of Texas, Houston, Texas, United States of America. Larissa.J.Estes@uth.tmc.edu
Linda E Lloyd
Michelle Teti
Sheela Raja
Lisa Bowleg
Kristi L Allgood
Nancy Glick

Funding

PHS HHS 03048
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAudio Computer-Assisted Self Interviewing (ACASI) has improved the reliability and accuracy of self-reported HIV health and risk behavior data, yet few studies account for how participants experience the data collection process. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsThis exploratory qualitative analysis aimed to better understand the experience and implications of using ACASI among HIV-positive women participating in sexual risk reduction interventions in Chicago (n = 12) and Philadelphia (n = 18). Strategies of Grounded Theory were used to explore participants' ACASI experiences. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Key themes we identified included themes that could be attributed to the ACASI and other methods of data collection (e.g., paper-based self-administered questionnaire or face-to-face interviews). The key themes were usability; privacy and honesty; socially desirable responses and avoiding judgment; and unintentional discomfort resulting from recalling risky behavior using the ACASI. Despite both positive and negative findings about the ACASI experience, we conclude that ACASI is in general an appropriate method for collecting sensitive data about HIV/AIDS risk behaviors among HIV-positive women because it seemed to ensure privacy in the study population allowing for more honest responses, minimize socially desirable responses, and help participants avoid actual or perceived judgment.

Indexed as

Acquired Immunodeficiency SyndromeAdultAgedAudiovisual AidsChicagoComputersData CollectionFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedPhiladelphiaPrimary Health CareProgram Evaluation

Identifiers

PMID20161771
PMCPMC2818842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.