Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27710083›Full record

ArticleAIDS education and prevention : official publication of the International Society for AIDS Education2016

Social Desirability Response Bias and Other Factors That May Influence Self-Reports of Substance Use and HIV Risk Behaviors: A Qualitative Study of Drug Users in Vietnam.

Carl A Latkin, Nguyen Vu Tuyet Mai, Tran Viet Ha, Teerada Sripaipan, Carla Zelaya, Nguyen Le Minh, Giuliana Morales, Vivian F Go

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AIDS education and prevention : official publication of the International Society for AIDS Education, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  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. Review
  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

8 authors.

Carl A LatkinDepartment of Health, Behavior and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.
Nguyen Vu Tuyet MaiDepartment of Health Behavior, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Tran Viet HaDepartment of Health Behavior, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Teerada SripaipanDepartment of Health Behavior, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Carla ZelayaDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.
Nguyen Le MinhThai Nguyen Center for Preventive Medicine, Thai Nguyen, Vietnam.
Giuliana MoralesDepartment of Health Behavior, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Vivian F GoDepartment of Health Behavior, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

Funding

Virology, Immunology, and Microbiology CoreP30AI050410 · NIAID · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI DAVID M. MARGOLIS · 2001 to 2026
$76.9M
Vaccine Response and Immunotherapeutics SWGP30AI094189 · NIAID · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Bryan Lau · 2012 to 2026
$67.0M
A comprehensive approach to secondary HIV prevention and care among positivesR01DA032217 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI LATKIN, CARL A · 2011 to 2015
$5.1M
Prevention for Positives: A Randomized Controlled Trial Among Vietnamese HIV-PosiR01DA022962 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI GO, VIVIAN F. · 2007 to 2011
$3.1M
NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI050410NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI094189NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA022962NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA032217
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The accuracy of self-report data may be marred by a range of cognitive and motivational biases, including social desirability response bias. The current study used qualitative interviews to examine self-report response biases among participants in a large randomized clinical trial in Vietnam. A sample of study participants was reinterviewed. The vast majority reported being truthful and emphasized the importance of rapport with the study staff for achieving veridical data. However, some stated that rapport may lead to under reporting of risk behaviors in order not to disappoint study staff. Other factors that appeared to influence accuracy of self-reports include fear that the information may be divulged, desire to enroll in the study, length of the survey, and memory. There are several methods that can be employed to reduce response biases, and future studies should systematically address response bias and include methods to assess whether approaches and survey items are effective in improving accuracy of self-report data.

Indexed as

Risk-TakingSocial DesirabilityAdultAgedBiasDrug UsersFearHIV InfectionsHumansInterpersonal RelationsInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSelf Disclosure

Identifiers

PMID27710083
PMCPMC5268760

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.