Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35033117›Full record

Trial reportReproductive health2022

Interviewing adolescent girls about sexual and reproductive health: a qualitative study exploring how best to ask questions in structured follow-up interviews in a randomized controlled trial in Zambia.

Katja Isaksen, Ingvild Sandøy, Joseph Zulu, Andrea Melberg, Sheena Kabombwe, Mweetwa Mudenda, Patrick Musonda, Joar Svanemyr

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Reproductive health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Katja IsaksenCentre for Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health (CISMAC), Oslo, Norway.
Ingvild SandøyCentre for Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health (CISMAC), Oslo, Norway. Ingvild.Sandoy@uib.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5567-4588
Joseph ZuluCentre for Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health (CISMAC), Oslo, Norway.
Andrea MelbergCentre for Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health (CISMAC), Oslo, Norway.
Sheena KabombweSchool of Education, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
Mweetwa MudendaCentre for Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health (CISMAC), Oslo, Norway.
Patrick MusondaCentre for Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health (CISMAC), Oslo, Norway.
Joar SvanemyrCentre for Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health (CISMAC), Oslo, Norway.

Funding

Norges Forskningsråd 223269Norges Forskningsråd 248121
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNumerous studies have documented inconsistent reporting of sexual behaviour by adolescents. The validity and reliability of self-reported data on issues considered sensitive, incriminating or embarrassing, is prone to social-desirability bias. Some studies have found that Audio Computer-Assisted Self Interviewing (ACASI) that removes the personal interaction involved in face-to-face interviews, decreases item non-response and increases reporting of sensitive behaviours, but others have found inconsistent or contradictory results. To reduce social desirability bias in the reporting of sensitive behaviours, face-to-face interviews were combined with ACASI in a cluster randomized trial involving adolescents in Zambia.

methodsTo explore adolescent girls' experiences and opinions of being interviewed about sexual and reproductive health, we combined Focus Group Discussions with girl participants and individual semi-structured interviews with teachers. This study was done after the participants had been interviewed for the 6

resultsRespondents explained often feeling shy, embarrassed or uncomfortable when asked questions about sex, pregnancy and abortion face-to-face. Questions on sexual activity elicited feelings of shame, and teachers, research assistants and girls alike noted that direct questions about sexual activities limit what the participant girls may be willing to share. Responding to more indirect questions in relation to the context of a romantic relationship was slightly easier. Efforts by interviewers to signal that they did not judge the participants for their behavior and increased familiarity with the interviewer reduced discomfort over time. Although some appreciated the opportunity to respond to questions on their own, the privacy offered by ACASI also provided an opportunity to give false answers. Answering on tablets could be challenging, but participants were reluctant to ask for assistance for fear of being judged as not conversant with technology.

conclusionStrategies to avoid using overly direct language and descriptive words, asking questions within the context of a romantic relationship and a focus on establishing familiarity and trust can reduce reporting bias. For the use of ACASI, considerations must be given to the context and characteristics of the study population.

Indexed as

Reproductive HealthSexual BehaviorAdolescentFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansPregnancyReproducibility of ResultsZambiaACASIAdolescentsSexual and reproductive healthSurvey methodsZambia

Identifiers

PMID35033117
PMCPMC8761275

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.