Lessons Learned From the Implementation of a Pilot Study on Self-collected Specimen Return by Sexual Minority Men (Project Caboodle!): Qualitative Exploration
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Self-collection of specimens at home and their return by mail might help reduce some of the barriers to HIV and bacterial sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening encountered by gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM). To evaluate the benefits and challenges of bringing this approach to scale, researchers are increasingly requesting GBMSM to return self-collected specimens as part of web-based sexual health studies. Testing self-collected hair samples for preexposure prophylaxis drug levels may also be a viable option to identify GBMSM who face adherence difficulties and offer them support. OBJECTIVE: Project Caboodle! sought to evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of self-collecting at home and returning by mail 5 specimens (a finger-stick blood sample, a pharyngeal swab, a rectal swab, a urine specimen, and a hair sample) among 100 sexually active GBMSM in the United States aged between 18 and 34 years. In this manuscript, we aimed to describe the key lessons learned from our study's implementation and to present recommendations offered by participants to maximize the rates of self-collected specimen return. METHODS: Following the specimen self-collection phase, a subset of 25 participants (11 who returned all 5 specimens, 4 who returned between 1 and 4 specimens, and 10 who did not return any specimens) was selected for in-depth interviews conducted via a videoconferencing platform. During the session, a semistructured interview guide was used to discuss the factors influencing decisions regarding returning self-collected specimens for laboratory processing. The transcripts were analyzed using template analysis. RESULTS: University branding of web-based and physical materials instilled a sense of trust in participants and increased their confidence in the test results. Shipping the specimen self-collection box in plain unmarked packaging promoted discretion during transit and on its receipt. Using different colored bags with matching color-coded instructions to self-collect each type of specimen minimized the potential for confusion. Participants recommended including prerecorded instructional videos to supplement the written instructions, providing information on the importance of triple-site bacterial STI testing, and adding a reminder of the types of testing that would and would not be conducted on hair samples. Participants also suggested tailoring the specimen self-collection box to include only the tests that they might be interested in completing at that time, adding real-time videoconferencing to the beginning of the study to introduce the research team, and sending personalized reminders following the delivery of the specimen self-collection box. CONCLUSIONS: Our results offer valuable insights into aspects that facilitated participant engagement in self-collected specimen return, as well as areas for potential improvement to maximize return rates. Our findings can help guide the design of future large-scale studies and public health programs for home-based HIV, bacterial STI, and preexposure prophylaxis adherence testing. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/13647.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,051 | 0,051 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,011 | 0,012 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».