Chat Room Interventions: Protecting and Respecting Participants - Scott D. Rhodes
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Chat Room Interventions:
Protecting and Respecting
Participants
Scott D. Rhodes
Department of Social Sciences and Health Policy
Division of Public Health Sciences
Wake Forest University School of MedicineThe Internet An important tool for social networking and support, meeting friends and sexual partners, and building community
The Internet and risk for HIV & STD infection More likely to report: • Sex with men and women • Unprotected anal sex • More partners, and • STD infection history
CyBER/M4M
Chat room-Based Education and Referral/ Men for Men
Chat room HIV prevention
intervention designed
using CBPR
Interventionists trained to
serve as health
advisors, opinion
leaders, community
advocates
Quantitative and
qualitative data
collected
Rhodes SD, et al. A pilot intervention utilizing Internet chat rooms to
prevent HIV risk behaviors among men who have sex with men.
Public Health Reports 2010;S1:29-37.HIV testing
Preliminary data suggests disproportionately
low rates
37% of CyBER/M4M participants ages 18-62
years old reported testing in past 12
months
– 32% of those 25-44 years old
Rhodes SD, et al. Comparing MSM in the southeastern US who
participated in an HIV prevention chat room-based outreach
intervention and those who did not: how different are the
baseline HIV-risk profiles?
Health Educ Res 2007;23:180-90.CyBER/testing
R21MH082689
CBPR proof-of-concept study
Builds on CyBER/M4M
Based in natural helping, social cognitive
theory, and empowerment education
Designed to increase HIV testing through
chat room promotionImplementation CyBER/testing interventionist Insider’s knowledge of MSM communities Housed at community partner agency Every 30 minutes posts standardized theory-based triggers about HIV testing and his availability to provide information and answer questions about testing within the public chat room
Evaluation
Brief online behavioral assessment
– At pretest and 6-months after initiation of
implementation
Extant data abstracted from profiles at 3
months
• To compare those who participated in
the assessment and those that did notPreliminary findings
Pretest At 6 mons OR (95% CI) p
(n=346) (n=315)
Mean age 37.2 (11.3) 36.9 (11.8) .7
Sex w both 74 (21.4%) 60 (19.0%) .5
Tested for HIV
during past 12
months 154 (44.5%) 187 (59.4%) 1.8 (1.4, 2.5)Respecting chat room MSM
• Is this intervention even appropriate given
the purpose of the online space for MSM?
– Reviewed published community norms and
standards
– Careful training of all staff to adhere to these
guidelines
• Safe space and nonintrusive
– Part of the key is use of public room
• Although this makes other types of online sites
difficult (or impossible) to intervene within using
this approach: BGClive; Manhunt; Dudesnude;
Squirt; Craigslist; SilverDaddies…Respecting chat room MSM
• Low intensity approach
• Engagement of interventionist as
participant in the chat room
• Building trust; being defended for “right” to be
in the room by others
• Ongoing steering committee review,
guidance
– Approach, types of triggers and messages,
profile representationWhat about assessment data? • Recruitment in the public chat room – Not targeting individuals • Low intensity approach • Security of the data
What about those
< 18 years old?
• Reducing risk of those under 18 years old:
– Before providing URL or password through
private chat, recruiter asks, "By the way, how
old are you?"
– If ≥ 18 years old, provides password and URL
using private instant messaging
– No indication that participants must be ≥18
years old. If the participant isConsent? Must be brief because of competing priorities of being in the chat room Introductory paragraph on the URL that explains that we are asking the potential participant to participate in a research study that is designed to explore HIV testing rates among men online, participation is voluntary, and all information is anonymous. – Includes Dr Rhodes’ telephone number and e- mail address for questions or concerns, and the IRB Director’s telephone number. – Recruiter’s profile provides further detail • Committed to transparency
Collecting extant profile data
Online responses to closed-ended
standardized items that are accessible
to all within the chat room
Considered to be public if anyone can go
into the room and read
– Eavesdropping or ethnography
Moreno MA, Fost NC, Christakis DA.
Research ethics in the MySpace era.
Pediatrics 2008;121(1):157-61.Aliases and e-mail addresses
Risks associated with abstracting chat
room aliases may be minimal given that
aliases tend to be unrecognizable (e.g.,
“Top4U,” “BadBoyNC,” “Almoststr8”)
– For some chatters, point is to maintain
anonymity
We have never seen a chat room alias
such as “Scott_Rhodes”
E-mail addresses may be different.
• For PayPal compensation, etc.Key to success
Community member involvement: what is
realistic, what will work
Maintain relationships and open communication
with IRB and NIH personnel
– Understandings and interpretations vary,
priorities vary
• Participants < 18 years old became
problematic for some
• NIH Code 44
• Certificate of Confidentiality
– Summoned to IRB to show them how the
rooms function, ease of entering a chat
room, what aliases look likeChat room interventions The Internet has emerged as an important tool for the delivery of health promotion and disease prevention interventions Multiple questions remain in terms of harnessing the rapidly evolving environment while exhibiting high levels of respect and ensuring the protection of online communities
You can also read