Cargando…

Methodological and Ethical Implications of Using Remote Data Collection Tools to Measure Sexual and Reproductive Health and Gender-Based Violence Outcomes among Women and Girls in Humanitarian and Fragile Settings: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review of Peer-Reviewed Research

Purpose: This systematic review investigates the methodological and ethical implications of using remote data collection tools to measure sexual/reproductive health (SRH) and gender-based violence (GBV) outcomes among women and girls in humanitarian and fragile settings. Methods: We included empiric...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vahedi, Luissa, Qushua, Najat, Seff, Ilana, Doering, Michelle, Stoll, Carrie, Bartels, Susan A., Stark, Lindsay
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10486180/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35607868
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15248380221097439
_version_ 1785102950987726848
author Vahedi, Luissa
Qushua, Najat
Seff, Ilana
Doering, Michelle
Stoll, Carrie
Bartels, Susan A.
Stark, Lindsay
author_facet Vahedi, Luissa
Qushua, Najat
Seff, Ilana
Doering, Michelle
Stoll, Carrie
Bartels, Susan A.
Stark, Lindsay
author_sort Vahedi, Luissa
collection PubMed
description Purpose: This systematic review investigates the methodological and ethical implications of using remote data collection tools to measure sexual/reproductive health (SRH) and gender-based violence (GBV) outcomes among women and girls in humanitarian and fragile settings. Methods: We included empirical studies of all design types that collected any self-reported primary data related to SRH/GBV using information and communication technology, in the absence of in-person interactions, from women and girls in humanitarian and fragile settings. The search was run in March 2021 without filters or limits in Ovid Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Scopus. Quality was assessed using an adapted version of the MMAT tool. Two reviewers independently determined whether each full text source met the eligibility criteria, and conflicts were resolved through consensus. A-priori extraction fields concerned methodological rigor and ethical considerations. Results: 21 total studies were included. The majority of studies were quantitative descriptive, aiming to ascertain prevalence. Telephone interviews, online surveys, and mobile applications, SMS surveys, and online discussion forums were used as remote data collection tools. Key methodological considerations included the overuse of non-probability samples, lack of a defined sampling frame, the introduction of bias by making eligibility contingent on owning/accessing technology, and the lack of qualitative probing. Ethical consideration pertained to including persons with low literacy, participant safety, use of referral services, and the gender digital divide. Conclusion: Findings are intended to guide SRH/GBV researchers and academics in critically assessing methodological and ethical implications of using remote data collection tools to measure SRH and GBV in humanitarian and fragile settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10486180
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104861802023-09-09 Methodological and Ethical Implications of Using Remote Data Collection Tools to Measure Sexual and Reproductive Health and Gender-Based Violence Outcomes among Women and Girls in Humanitarian and Fragile Settings: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review of Peer-Reviewed Research Vahedi, Luissa Qushua, Najat Seff, Ilana Doering, Michelle Stoll, Carrie Bartels, Susan A. Stark, Lindsay Trauma Violence Abuse Review Manuscripts Purpose: This systematic review investigates the methodological and ethical implications of using remote data collection tools to measure sexual/reproductive health (SRH) and gender-based violence (GBV) outcomes among women and girls in humanitarian and fragile settings. Methods: We included empirical studies of all design types that collected any self-reported primary data related to SRH/GBV using information and communication technology, in the absence of in-person interactions, from women and girls in humanitarian and fragile settings. The search was run in March 2021 without filters or limits in Ovid Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Scopus. Quality was assessed using an adapted version of the MMAT tool. Two reviewers independently determined whether each full text source met the eligibility criteria, and conflicts were resolved through consensus. A-priori extraction fields concerned methodological rigor and ethical considerations. Results: 21 total studies were included. The majority of studies were quantitative descriptive, aiming to ascertain prevalence. Telephone interviews, online surveys, and mobile applications, SMS surveys, and online discussion forums were used as remote data collection tools. Key methodological considerations included the overuse of non-probability samples, lack of a defined sampling frame, the introduction of bias by making eligibility contingent on owning/accessing technology, and the lack of qualitative probing. Ethical consideration pertained to including persons with low literacy, participant safety, use of referral services, and the gender digital divide. Conclusion: Findings are intended to guide SRH/GBV researchers and academics in critically assessing methodological and ethical implications of using remote data collection tools to measure SRH and GBV in humanitarian and fragile settings. SAGE Publications 2022-05-24 2023-10 /pmc/articles/PMC10486180/ /pubmed/35607868 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15248380221097439 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Review Manuscripts
Vahedi, Luissa
Qushua, Najat
Seff, Ilana
Doering, Michelle
Stoll, Carrie
Bartels, Susan A.
Stark, Lindsay
Methodological and Ethical Implications of Using Remote Data Collection Tools to Measure Sexual and Reproductive Health and Gender-Based Violence Outcomes among Women and Girls in Humanitarian and Fragile Settings: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review of Peer-Reviewed Research
title Methodological and Ethical Implications of Using Remote Data Collection Tools to Measure Sexual and Reproductive Health and Gender-Based Violence Outcomes among Women and Girls in Humanitarian and Fragile Settings: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review of Peer-Reviewed Research
title_full Methodological and Ethical Implications of Using Remote Data Collection Tools to Measure Sexual and Reproductive Health and Gender-Based Violence Outcomes among Women and Girls in Humanitarian and Fragile Settings: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review of Peer-Reviewed Research
title_fullStr Methodological and Ethical Implications of Using Remote Data Collection Tools to Measure Sexual and Reproductive Health and Gender-Based Violence Outcomes among Women and Girls in Humanitarian and Fragile Settings: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review of Peer-Reviewed Research
title_full_unstemmed Methodological and Ethical Implications of Using Remote Data Collection Tools to Measure Sexual and Reproductive Health and Gender-Based Violence Outcomes among Women and Girls in Humanitarian and Fragile Settings: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review of Peer-Reviewed Research
title_short Methodological and Ethical Implications of Using Remote Data Collection Tools to Measure Sexual and Reproductive Health and Gender-Based Violence Outcomes among Women and Girls in Humanitarian and Fragile Settings: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review of Peer-Reviewed Research
title_sort methodological and ethical implications of using remote data collection tools to measure sexual and reproductive health and gender-based violence outcomes among women and girls in humanitarian and fragile settings: a mixed methods systematic review of peer-reviewed research
topic Review Manuscripts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10486180/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35607868
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15248380221097439
work_keys_str_mv AT vahediluissa methodologicalandethicalimplicationsofusingremotedatacollectiontoolstomeasuresexualandreproductivehealthandgenderbasedviolenceoutcomesamongwomenandgirlsinhumanitarianandfragilesettingsamixedmethodssystematicreviewofpeerreviewedresearch
AT qushuanajat methodologicalandethicalimplicationsofusingremotedatacollectiontoolstomeasuresexualandreproductivehealthandgenderbasedviolenceoutcomesamongwomenandgirlsinhumanitarianandfragilesettingsamixedmethodssystematicreviewofpeerreviewedresearch
AT seffilana methodologicalandethicalimplicationsofusingremotedatacollectiontoolstomeasuresexualandreproductivehealthandgenderbasedviolenceoutcomesamongwomenandgirlsinhumanitarianandfragilesettingsamixedmethodssystematicreviewofpeerreviewedresearch
AT doeringmichelle methodologicalandethicalimplicationsofusingremotedatacollectiontoolstomeasuresexualandreproductivehealthandgenderbasedviolenceoutcomesamongwomenandgirlsinhumanitarianandfragilesettingsamixedmethodssystematicreviewofpeerreviewedresearch
AT stollcarrie methodologicalandethicalimplicationsofusingremotedatacollectiontoolstomeasuresexualandreproductivehealthandgenderbasedviolenceoutcomesamongwomenandgirlsinhumanitarianandfragilesettingsamixedmethodssystematicreviewofpeerreviewedresearch
AT bartelssusana methodologicalandethicalimplicationsofusingremotedatacollectiontoolstomeasuresexualandreproductivehealthandgenderbasedviolenceoutcomesamongwomenandgirlsinhumanitarianandfragilesettingsamixedmethodssystematicreviewofpeerreviewedresearch
AT starklindsay methodologicalandethicalimplicationsofusingremotedatacollectiontoolstomeasuresexualandreproductivehealthandgenderbasedviolenceoutcomesamongwomenandgirlsinhumanitarianandfragilesettingsamixedmethodssystematicreviewofpeerreviewedresearch