Dataset Information

Process and implementation of Audio Computer Assisted Self-Interviewing (ACASI) assessments in low resource settings: a case example from Zambia.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Studies from low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) indicate that the use of audio computer-assisted self-interviewing (ACASI) is associated with more accurate reporting of sensitive behaviors (e.g. substance use and sexual risk behaviors) compared with interviewer-administered questionnaires. There is a lack of published information on the process of designing, developing, and implementing ACASI in LMIC. In this paper we describe our experience implementing an ACASI system for use with a population of orphans and vulnerable children in Zambia. METHODS:A questionnaire of mental health, substance use, and HIV risk behaviors was converted into an ACASI system, tested in pilot and validity studies, and implemented for use in a randomized controlled trial. Successes, barriers, and challenges associated with each stage in the development and implementation of ACASI are described. RESULTS:We were able to convert a lengthy and complex survey into an ACASI system that was feasible for use in Zambia. Lessons learned include the importance of: (1) piloting the written and electronic versions; (2) proper and extensive training for study assessors to use ACASI and for those doing voice recordings; and (3) attention to logistics such as appropriate space, internet, and power. CONCLUSIONS:We found that ACASI was feasible and acceptable in Zambia with proper planning, training, and supervision. Given mounting evidence indicating that ACASI provides more accurate self-report data and immediate data download compared with interview-administered measures, it may be an effective and economical alternative for behavioral health research studies in LMIC.

SUBMITTER: Kane JC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5454788 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Process and implementation of Audio Computer Assisted Self-Interviewing (ACASI) assessments in low resource settings: a case example from Zambia.

Kane J C JC Murray L K LK Sughrue S S DeMulder J J Skavenski van Wyk S S Queenan J J Tang A A Bolton P P

Global mental health (Cambridge, England) 20160812

<h4>Background</h4>Studies from low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) indicate that the use of audio computer-assisted self-interviewing (ACASI) is associated with more accurate reporting of sensitive behaviors (e.g. substance use and sexual risk behaviors) compared with interviewer-administered questionnaires. There is a lack of published information on the process of designing, developing, and implementing ACASI in LMIC. In this paper we describe our experience implementing an ACASI system f ...[more]

PMID: 28596892

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has again demonstrated the critical role of effective infection prevention and control (IPC) implementation to combat infectious disease threats. Standards such as the World Health Organization (WHO) IPC minimum requirements offer a basis, but robust evidence on effective IPC implementation strategies in low-resource settings remains limited. We aimed to qualitatively assess IPC implementation themes in these settings.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with IPC experts from low-resource settings, guided by a standardised questionnaire. Applying a qualitative inductive thematic analysis, IPC implementation examples from interview transcripts were coded, collated into sub-themes, grouped again into broad themes, and finally reviewed to ensure validity. Sub-themes appearing ≥ 3 times in data were highlighted as frequent IPC implementation themes and all findings were summarised descriptively.ResultsInterviews were conducted with IPC experts from 29 countries in six WHO regions. Frequent IPC implementation themes including the related critical actions to achieve the WHO IPC core components included: (1) To develop IPC programmes: continuous advocacy with leadership, initial external technical assistance, stepwise approach to build resources, use of catalysts, linkages with other programmes, role of national IPC associations and normative legal actions; (2) To develop guidelines: early planning for their operationalization, initial external technical assistance and local guideline adaption; (3) To establish training: attention to methods, fostering local leadership, and sustainable health system linkages such as developing an IPC career path; (4) To establish health care-associated (HAI) surveillance: feasible but high-impact pilots, multidisciplinary collaboration, mentorship, careful consideration of definitions and data quality, and "data for action"; (5) To implement multimodal strategies: clear communication to explain multimodal strategies, attention to certain elements, and feasible but high-impact pilots; (6) To develop monitoring, audit and feedback: feasible but high-impact pilots, attention to methods such as positive (not punitive) incentives and "data for action"; (7) To improve staffing and bed occupancy: participation of national actors to set standards and attention to methods such as use of data; and (8) To promote built environment: involvement of IPC professionals in facility construction, attention to multimodal strategy elements, and long-term advocacy.ConclusionsThese IPC implementation themes offer important qualitative evidence for IPC professionals to consider.

Project description:Background Failing to account for the resources required to successfully implement public health interventions can lead to an underestimation of costs and budget impact, optimistic cost-effectiveness estimates, and ultimately a disconnect between published evidence and public health decision-making. Methods We developed a conceptual framework for assessing implementation costs. We illustrate the use of this framework with case studies involving interventions for tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS in resource-limited settings. Results Costs of implementing public health interventions may be conceptualized as occurring across three phases: design, initiation, and maintenance. In the design phase, activities include developing intervention components and establishing necessary infrastructure (e.g., technology, standard operating procedures). Initiation phase activities include training, initiation of supply chains and quality assurance procedures, and installation of equipment. Implementation costs in the maintenance phase include ongoing technical support, monitoring and evaluation, and troubleshooting unexpected obstacles. Within each phase, implementation costs can be incurred at the site of delivery (“site-specific” costs) or more centrally (“above-service” or “central” costs). For interventions evaluated in the context of research studies, implementation costs should be classified as programmatic, research-related, or shared research/program costs. Purely research-related costs are often excluded from analysis of programmatic implementation. Conclusions In evaluating public health interventions in resource-limited settings, accounting for implementation costs enables more realistic estimates of budget impact and cost-effectiveness and provides important insights into program feasibility, scale-up, and sustainability. Assessment of implementation costs should be planned prospectively and performed in a standardized manner to ensure generalizability.

Project description:Harmonizing measures across studies can facilitate comparisons and strengthen the science, but procedures for establishing common data elements are rarely documented. We detail a rigorous, 2-year process to harmonize measures across the Prevention And Treatment through a Comprehensive Care Continuum for HIV-affected Adolescents in Resource Constrained Settings (PATC3H) consortium, consisting of eight federally-funded studies. We created a repository of measured constructs from each study, classified and selected constructs for harmonization, and identified survey instruments. Measures were harmonized for implementation science, HIV prevention and care, demographics and sexual behavior, mental health and substance use, and economic assessment. Importantly, we present our harmonized implementation science constructs. A common set of implementation science constructs have yet to be recommended in the literature for low-to-middle-income countries despite increasing recognition of their importance to delivering and scaling up effective interventions. Drawing on RE-AIM (Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance) and the Implementation Outcomes Framework, items were harmonized for staff/administrators and study participants to measure reach, adoption, implementation, maintenance, feasibility, acceptability, appropriateness, and fidelity. The process undertaken to harmonize measures and the codified set of implementation science measures developed by our consortium can inform future data harmonization efforts, critical to strengthening the replication and generalizability of findings while facilitating collaborative research-especially in resource-limited settings. We conclude with recommendations for research consortia, namely ensuring representation from all study teams and research priorities; adopting a flexible, transparent, and systematic approach; strengthening the literature on implementation science harmonization; and being responsive to life events (e.g., COVID-19).Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43477-022-00042-7.

Dataset Information

Process and implementation of Audio Computer Assisted Self-Interviewing (ACASI) assessments in low resource settings: a case example from Zambia.

Publications

Process and implementation of Audio Computer Assisted Self-Interviewing (ACASI) assessments in low resource settings: a case example from Zambia.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets