OBJECTIVE: To test acceptability and reliability of audio computer-assisted self-interviewing (ACASI) system administered at the household level to gather data on risk behaviors among adolescents in Mexico. METHODS: Answers to sensitive behavior-related questions obtained using ACASI systems were compared with answers to the same questions obtained through face-to-face interviews (FFIs). Focus groups were conducted to explore ACASI acceptability among adolescents and its feasibility in obtaining better self-reported data on sensitive behaviors. RESULTS: ACASI was adolescents' preferred method for reporting risk behaviors, particularly sexual behavior, and did not pose greater challenges to respondents versus FFIs. Also, more risk behaviors were reported through ACASI versus FFIs. CONCLUSION: The use of ACASI systems in disadvantaged households to obtain data on adolescent risk behavior is not only feasible but may also improve data quality in the case of complex questionnaires, compared with FFIs, and should therefore be considered as an alternative survey method.
OBJECTIVE: To test acceptability and reliability of audio computer-assisted self-interviewing (ACASI) system administered at the household level to gather data on risk behaviors among adolescents in Mexico. METHODS: Answers to sensitive behavior-related questions obtained using ACASI systems were compared with answers to the same questions obtained through face-to-face interviews (FFIs). Focus groups were conducted to explore ACASI acceptability among adolescents and its feasibility in obtaining better self-reported data on sensitive behaviors. RESULTS: ACASI was adolescents' preferred method for reporting risk behaviors, particularly sexual behavior, and did not pose greater challenges to respondents versus FFIs. Also, more risk behaviors were reported through ACASI versus FFIs. CONCLUSION: The use of ACASI systems in disadvantaged households to obtain data on adolescent risk behavior is not only feasible but may also improve data quality in the case of complex questionnaires, compared with FFIs, and should therefore be considered as an alternative survey method.
Authors: Monika K Goyal; Joel A Fein; Gia M Badolato; Judy A Shea; Maria E Trent; Stephen J Teach; Theoklis E Zaoutis; James M Chamberlain Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2017-01-10 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Jennifer L Reed; Brittany E Punches; Regina G Taylor; Maurizio Macaluso; Evaline A Alessandrini; Jessica A Kahn Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2017-05-27 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Kenetta L Nunn; Benjamin J Ridenhour; Emily M Chester; Virginia J Vitzthum; J Dennis Fortenberry; Larry J Forney Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2019-03-14 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Monika K Goyal; Judy A Shea; Katie L Hayes; Gia Badolato; James M Chamberlain; Theoklis Zaoutis; Joel Fein Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2016-06-20 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Sophie C Reid; Sylvia D Kauer; Stephen J C Hearps; Alexander H D Crooke; Angela S Khor; Lena A Sanci; George C Patton Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2013-06-19 Impact factor: 2.497