The Development of an Interactive Voice Response Survey for Noncommunicable Disease Risk Factor Estimation: Technical Assessment and Cognitive Testing

Dustin G Gibson, Brooke A Farrenkopf, Amanda Pereira, Alain B Labrique, George William Pariyo, Dustin G Gibson, Brooke A Farrenkopf, Amanda Pereira, Alain B Labrique, George William Pariyo

Abstract

Background: The rise in mobile phone ownership in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) presents an opportunity to transform existing data collection and surveillance methods. Administering surveys via interactive voice response (IVR) technology-a mobile phone survey (MPS) method-has potential to expand the current surveillance coverage and data collection, but formative work to contextualize the survey for LMIC deployment is needed.

Objective: The primary objectives of this study were to (1) cognitively test and identify challenging questions in a noncommunicable disease (NCD) risk factor questionnaire administered via an IVR platform and (2) assess the usability of the IVR platform.

Methods: We conducted two rounds of pilot testing the IVR survey in Baltimore, MD. Participants were included in the study if they identified as being from an LMIC. The first round included individual interviews to cognitively test the participant's understanding of the questions. In the second round, participants unique from those in round 1 were placed in focus groups and were asked to comment on the usability of the IVR platform.

Results: A total of 12 participants from LMICs were cognitively tested in round 1 to assess their understanding and comprehension of questions in an IVR-administered survey. Overall, the participants found that the majority of the questions were easy to understand and did not have difficulty recording most answers. The most frequent recommendation was to use country-specific examples and units of measurement. In round 2, a separate set of 12 participants assessed the usability of the IVR platform. Overall, participants felt that the length of the survey was appropriate (average: 18 min and 31 s), but the majority reported fatigue in answering questions that had a similar question structure. Almost all participants commented that they thought an IVR survey would lead to more honest, accurate responses than face-to-face questionnaires, especially for sensitive topics.

Conclusions: Overall, the participants indicated a clear comprehension of the IVR-administered questionnaire and that the IVR platform was user-friendly. Formative research and cognitive testing of the questionnaire is needed for further adaptation before deploying in an LMIC.

Keywords: cellular phone; interactive voice response; noncommunicable disease; public health surveillance; risk factors; survey methodology.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

©Dustin G Gibson, Brooke A Farrenkopf, Amanda Pereira, Alain B Labrique, George William Pariyo. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 05.05.2017.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Interactive voice response (IVR) survey design. NCD: noncommunicable disease.

References

    1. Information and Communications for Development: Maximizing Mobile. Washington, DC: World Bank Publications; 2012.
    1. World Health Organization . mHealth: New Horizons for Health through Mobile Technologies: Second Global Survey on eHealth (Global Observatory for Ehealth) Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2011.
    1. World Health Organization . Global action plan for the preventioncontrol of noncommunicable diseases 2013-2020. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2013.
    1. World Health Organization WHO. 2017. [2017-03-22]. Monitoring and surveillance of noncommunicable diseases
    1. Lam MY, Lee H, Bright R, Korzenik JR, Sands BE. Validation of interactive voice response system administration of the Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2009 Apr;15(4):599–607. doi: 10.1002/ibd.20803.
    1. Ruikar V. Interactive Voice/Web Response System in clinical research. Perspect Clin Res. 2016;7(1):15–20. doi: 10.4103/2229-3485.173781.
    1. Finger JD, Tafforeau J, Gisle L, Oja L, Ziese T, Thelen J, Mensink G, Lange C. Development of the European Health Interview Survey - Physical Activity Questionnaire (EHIS-PAQ) to monitor physical activity in the European Union. Arch Public Health. 2015;73:59. doi: 10.1186/s13690-015-0110-z.
    1. Levine RE, Fowler FJ, Brown JA. Role of cognitive testing in the development of the CAHPS Hospital Survey. Health Serv Res. 2005 Dec;40(6 Pt 2):2037–56. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00472.x.
    1. Alaimo K, Olson CM, Frongillo EA. Importance of cognitive testing for survey items: an example from food security questionnaires. J Nutr Educ. 1999 Sep;31(5):269–275. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3182(99)70463-2.
    1. Bloomberg. 2016. [2017-03-22]. Data for Health
    1. Hyder A, Wosu A, Gibson D, Labrique A, Ali J, Pariyo G. Noncommunicable disease risk factors and mobile phones: a proposed research agenda. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(5):e133. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7246.
    1. WHO . STEPS: A framework for surveillance: WHO STEPwise approach to NCD surveillance. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2003.
    1. Global Adult Tobacco Survey Collaborative Group . Tobacco Questions for Surveys: A Subset of Key Questions from the Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS), 2nd edition. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2011.
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CDC. 2016. [2017-03-11]. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System
    1. WHO. 2017. [2017-03-22]. NCD Global Monitoring Framework: ensuring progress on noncommunicable diseases in countries
    1. votomobile. 2017. [2017-03-22]. VOTO
    1. Dillon B. Using mobile phones to collect panel data in developing countries. J Int Dev. 2011 Feb 09;24(4):518–527. doi: 10.1002/jid.1771.
    1. Masuda YJ, Fortmann L, Gugerty MK, Smith-Nilson M, Cook J. Pictorial approaches for measuring time use in rural Ethiopia. Soc Indic Res. 2014 Jan;115(1):467–482. doi: 10.1007/s11205-012-9995-x.
    1. Conrad FG, Schober MF. Clarifying question meaning in a household telephone survey. Public Opin Q. 2000;64(1):1–28.
    1. Tourangeau R, Couper MP, Steiger DM. Humanizing self-administered surveys: experiments on social presence in web and IVR surveys. Comput Human Behav. 2003 Jan;19(1):1–24. doi: 10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00032-8.
    1. Singer E, Von TD, Miller E. Confidentiality assurances and response: a quantitative review of the experimental literature. Public Opin Q. 1995;59(1):66–77. doi: 10.1086/269458.
    1. Pegus C. Crowdsourcing citizen feedback on district development in Ghana using interactive voice response surveys. Making All Voices Count Practice Paper. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies; 2016. .

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi