Previously submitted to: JMIR Public Health and Surveillance (no longer under consideration since Mar 16, 2018)
Date Submitted: Mar 11, 2018
Open Peer Review Period: Mar 16, 2018 - Mar 16, 2018
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint
Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).
Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.
Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).
Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.
Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.
Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Privacy, confidentiality, and safety considerations for conducting geographic momentary assessment studies among persons who use drugs and men who have sex with men
Background:
Geographic momentary assessments (GMA) collect real-time behavioral data in one’s natural environment using a smartphone and could potentially increase the ecological validity of behavioral data. Several studies have evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of GMA among persons who use drugs (PWUD) and men who have sex with men (MSM), but fewer have discussed privacy, confidentiality, and safety concerns, particularly when illegal or stigmatized behavioral data were collected.
Objective:
This study explores perceptions regarding privacy, confidentiality, and safety of GMA research among PWUD and MSM recruited in three different settings (rural Appalachia, a mid-sized city in the South, and a mid-Atlantic city).
Methods:
Between November 2014 and April 2017 we recruited 35 PWUD from rural Appalachian Kentucky (N=20) and Baltimore, Maryland (N=15), and 20 MSM from Lexington, Kentucky to complete semi-structured qualitative interviews. Through thematic analyses, we identified and compared privacy, confidentiality, and safety concerns by demographic characteristics, risk behaviors, and setting.
Results:
Privacy, confidentiality, and safety concerns varied by setting, age, smartphone ownership, use of illegal drugs, and history of drug-related arrests. Among those who used drugs, participants reported concerns with being tracked and burden associated with carrying and safeguarding study phones and responding to survey prompts. Privacy and confidentiality concerns were noted in each setting, but tracking concerns were greatest among Baltimore participants and led many to feel that they (or others) would be unwilling to participate or comply with study procedures. While locations considered to be sensitive varied by setting, participants in all settings said they would take measures to prevent sensitive information from being collected (i.e. intentionally disable devices, leave phones at home, alter response times).
Conclusions:
Privacy, confidentiality, and safety concerns may limit the accuracy of risk location information, study compliance, and participation. As concerns were often greatest among those engaging in illegal behaviors and with the highest risk behaviors, selection bias and non-response bias could negatively influence the representativeness and validity of study findings.
Citation
The author of this paper has made a PDF available, but requires the user to login, or create an account.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.