Dataset Information

Nothing but the truth: Consistency and efficiency of the list experiment method for the measurement of sensitive health behaviours.

ABSTRACT: Rationale: Social desirability bias, which is the tendency to under-report socially, undesirable health behaviours, significantly distorts information on sensitive behaviours, gained from self-reports and prevents accurate estimation of the prevalence of those, behaviours. We contribute to a growing body of literature that seeks to assess the performance of the list experiment method to improve estimation of these sensitive health behaviours.

Method: We use a double-list experiment design in which respondents serve as the treatment group for one list and as the control group for the other list to estimate the prevalence of two sensitive health behaviours in different settings: condom use among 500 female sex workers in urban Senegal and physical intimate partner violence among 1700 partnered women in rural Burkina Faso. First, to assess whether the list experiment improves the accuracy of estimations of the prevalence of sensitive behaviours, we compare the prevalence rates estimated from self-reports with those elicited through the list experiment. Second, we test whether the prevalence rates of the sensitive behaviours obtained using the double-list design are similar, and we estimate the reduction in the standard errors obtained with this design. Finally, we compare the results obtained through another indirect elicitation method, the polling vote method.

Results: We show that the list experiment method reduces misreporting by 17 percentage points for condom use and 16-20 percentage points for intimate partner violence. Exploiting the double-list experiment design, we also demonstrate that the prevalence estimates obtained through the use of the two lists are identical in the full sample and across sub-groups and that the double-list design reduces the standard errors by approximately 40% compared to the standard errors in the simple list design. Finally, we show that the list experiment method leads to a higher estimation of the prevalence of sensitive behaviours than the polling vote method.

Conclusion: The study suggests that list experiments are an effective method to improve estimation of the prevalence of sensitive health behaviours.

SUBMITTER: Lepine A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7724128 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Nothing but the truth: Consistency and efficiency of the list experiment method for the measurement of sensitive health behaviours.

Lépine Aurélia A Treibich Carole C D'Exelle Ben B

Social science & medicine (1982) 20200829

<h4>Rationale</h4>Social desirability bias, which is the tendency to under-report socially, undesirable health behaviours, significantly distorts information on sensitive behaviours, gained from self-reports and prevents accurate estimation of the prevalence of those, behaviours. We contribute to a growing body of literature that seeks to assess the performance of the list experiment method to improve estimation of these sensitive health behaviours.<h4>Method</h4>We use a double-list experiment ...[more]

PMID: 33059302

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAccurately measuring stigmatized experiences is a challenge across reproductive health research. In this study, we tested a novel method - the list experiment - that aims to reduce underreporting of sensitive events by asking participants to report how many of a list of experiences they have had, not which ones. We applied the list experiment to measure "self-managed abortion" - any attempt by a person to end a pregnancy on one's own, outside of a clinical setting - a phenomenon that may be underreported in surveys due to a desire to avoid judgement.MethodsWe administered a double list experiment on self-managed abortion to a Texas-wide representative sample of 790 women of reproductive age in 2015. Participants were asked how many of a list of health experiences they had experienced; self-managed abortion was randomly added as an item to half of the lists. A difference in the average number of items reported by participants between lists with and without self-managed abortion provided a population level estimate of self-managed abortion. In 2017, we conducted cognitive interviews with women of reproductive age in four states to understand how women (1) interpreted the list experiment question format, and (2) interpreted the list item on prior experiences attempting to self-manage an abortion.ResultsResults from this list experiment estimated that 8% of women of reproductive age in Texas have ever self-managed an abortion. This number was higher than expected, thus, the researchers conducted cognitive interviews to better understand how people interpreted the list experiment on self-managed abortion. Some women interpreted "on your own" to mean "without the knowledge of friends or family", as opposed to "without medical assistance", as intended.ConclusionThe list experiment may have reduced under-reporting of self-managed abortion; however, the specific phrasing of the list item may also have unintentionally increased reporting of abortion experiences not considered "self-managed." High participation in and comprehension of the list experiment, however, suggests that this method is worthy of further exploration as tool for measuring stigmatized experiences.

Project description:PurposeTo develop a technique that assesses the accuracy of the breathing phase-specific volume image generation process by patient-specific breathing motion model using the original free-breathing computed tomographic (CT) scans as ground truths.MethodsSixteen lung cancer patients underwent a previously published protocol in which 25 free-breathing fast helical CT scans were acquired with a simultaneous breathing surrogate. A patient-specific motion model was constructed based on the tissue displacements determined by a state-of-the-art deformable image registration. The first image was arbitrarily selected as the reference image. The motion model was used, along with the free-breathing phase information of the original 25 image datasets, to generate a set of deformation vector fields that mapped the reference image to the 24 nonreference images. The high-pitch helically acquired original scans served as ground truths because they captured the instantaneous tissue positions during free breathing. Image similarity between the simulated and the original scans was assessed using deformable registration that evaluated the pointwise discordance throughout the lungs.ResultsQualitative comparisons using image overlays showed excellent agreement between the simulated images and the original images. Even large 2-cm diaphragm displacements were very well modeled, as was sliding motion across the lung-chest wall boundary. The mean error across the patient cohort was 1.15 ± 0.37 mm, and the mean 95th percentile error was 2.47 ± 0.78 mm.ConclusionThe proposed ground truth-based technique provided voxel-by-voxel accuracy analysis that could identify organ-specific or tumor-specific motion modeling errors for treatment planning. Despite a large variety of breathing patterns and lung deformations during the free-breathing scanning session, the 5-dimensionl CT technique was able to accurately reproduce the original helical CT scans, suggesting its applicability to a wide range of patients.

Dataset Information

Nothing but the truth: Consistency and efficiency of the list experiment method for the measurement of sensitive health behaviours.

Publications

Nothing but the truth: Consistency and efficiency of the list experiment method for the measurement of sensitive health behaviours.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets