Using Text Messaging Surveys in General Practice Research to Engage With People From Low-Income Groups: Multi-Methods Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: SMS text messages through mobile phones are a common means of interpersonal communication. SMS text message surveys are gaining traction in health care and research due to their feasibility and patient acceptability. However, challenges arise in implementing SMS text message surveys, especially when targeting marginalized populations, because of barriers to accessing phones and data as well as communication difficulties. In primary care, traditional surveys (paper-based and online) often face low response rates that are particularly pronounced among disadvantaged groups due to financial limitations, language barriers, and time constraints. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the potential of SMS text message-based patient recruitment and surveys within general practices situated in lower socioeconomic areas. This study was nested within the Reducing Alcohol-Harm in General Practice project that aimed to reduce alcohol-related harm through screening in Australian general practice. METHODS: This study follows a 2-step SMS text message data collection process. An initial SMS text message with an online survey link was sent to patients, followed by subsequent surveys every 3 months for consenting participants. Interviews were conducted with the local primary health network organization staff, the participating practice staff, and the clinicians. The qualitative data were analyzed using constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: Out of 6 general practices, 4 were able to send SMS text messages to their patients. The initial SMS text message was sent to 8333 patients and 702 responses (8.2%) were received, most of which were not from a low-income group. This low initial response was in contrast to the improved response rate to the ongoing 3-month SMS text message surveys (55/107, 51.4% at 3 months; 29/67, 43.3% at 6 months; and 44/102, 43.1% at 9 months). We interviewed 4 general practitioners, 4 nurses, and 4 administrative staff from 5 of the different practices. Qualitative data uncovered barriers to engaging marginalized groups including limited smartphone access, limited financial capacity (telephone, internet, and Wi-Fi credit), language barriers, literacy issues, mental health conditions, and physical limitations such as manual dexterity and vision issues. Practice managers and clinicians suggested strategies to overcome these barriers, including using paper-based surveys in trusted spaces, offering assistance during survey completion, and offering honoraria to support participation. CONCLUSIONS: While SMS text message surveys for primary care research may be useful for the broader population, additional efforts are required to ensure the representation and involvement of marginalized groups. More intensive methods such as in-person data collection may be more appropriate to capture the voice of low-income groups in primary care research. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.3399/BJGPO.2021.0037.
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 | 0,062 | 0,066 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
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 ».