Relative Efficiency of Field and Online Strategies in the Recruitment of HIV-Positive Men Who Have Sex With Men

Abstract

Efforts to reach HIV-positive men who have sex with men (MSM) and link them to care must be expanded; however, finding and recruiting them remains a challenge. We compared the efficiency of three recruitment sources in reaching self-identified HIV-positive MSM with various characteristics. Relative to recruitment online and at clubs and bars, AIDS Service Organizations (ASOs) were significantly more efficient in reaching HIV-positive MSM in general. This was also true for those with specific characteristics of interest such as substance/stimulant use, and HIV-positive MSM who were racial/ethnic minorities. Both ASOs and online recruitment were more efficient than clubs and bars in reaching HIV-positive MSM not taking HIV medication. This was also the case for White HIV-positive MSM in general, and White HIV-positive MSM who used substances and stimulants. Online recruitment was also more efficient than clubs and bars in reaching HIV-positive MSM who were young across the board.

Recruiting a US National Sample of HIV-Negative Gay and Bisexual Men to Complete at-Home Self-Administered HIV/STI Testing and Surveys: Challenges and Opportunities

“…In short, researchers have responded to the expansion of Internet use among GBM by adopting the Internet as a tool to study them (Chiasson et al, 2006; Grov, Breslow, Newcomb, Rosenberger, & Bauermeister, 2014). This includes using the Internet to identify and enroll participants for facilitated assessments (Bauermeister, Carballo-Dieguez, Ventuneac, & Dolezal, 2009; Carballo-Diéguez et al, 2011; Grov, Agyemang, Ventuneac, & Breslow, 2013; Grov, Rendina, & Parsons, 2014; Hernandez-Romieu et al., 2014; Hightow-Weidman et al, 2015; Hirshfield, Remien, Humberstone, Walavalkar, & Chiasson, 2004; Lelutiu-Weinberger et al, 2014; Mitchell & Petroll, 2013; Pachankis, Rendina, Ventuneac, Grov, & Parsons, 2014; Parsons, Vial, Starks, & Golub, 2013; Vial, Starks, & Parsons, 2014, 2015), identify and enroll participants for facilitated interventions (Adam et al, 2011; Khosropour, Johnson, Ricca, & Sullivan, 2013; Martinez et al, 2014; Parsons et al., 2013; Whiteley et al, 2012), conducting fully online studies (i.e. assessments and recruitment) (Adam et al, 2011; Bull, Lloyd, Rietmeijer, & McFarlane, 2004; Carpenter, Stoner, Mikko, Dhanak, & Parsons, 2009; Chiasson et al, 2005; Chiasson, Shuchat Shaw, Humberstone, Hirshfield, & Hartel, 2009; Christensen et al, 2013; Coleman et al, 2010; Gass, Hoff, Stephenson, & Sullivan, 2012; Greacen et al, 2013; Grov, Rendina, Breslow, et al, 2014; Grov, Rendina, Ventuneac, & Parsons, 2013; Grov, Rodriguez-Diaz, Ditmore, Restar, & Parsons, 2014; Hirshfield et al, 2010; Hirshfield, Grov, Parsons, Anderson, & Chiasson, 2015; Hirshfield et al, 2008; Holloway, Rice, et al, 2014; Jain & Ross, 2008; Marcus, Hickson, Weatherburn, & Schmidt, 2013; Matthews, Stephenson, & Sullivan, 2012; Mitchell & Petroll, 2012; Mustanski, Greene, Ryan, & Whitton, 2015; Mustanski, Rendina, Greene, Sullivan, & Parsons, 2014; Navejas, Neaigus, Torian, & Murrill, 2012; Oldenburg et al, 2015; Reece et al, 2010; Rendina, Breslow, et al, 2014; Rendina, Jimenez, Grov, Ventuneac, & Parsons, 2014; Rosenberg, Rothenberg, Kleinbaum, Stephenson, & Sullivan, 2013; Rosenmann & Safir, 2007; Rosser et al, 2009; …”

“…Other researchers have used a combination of both face-to-face (e.g., in gay concentrated neighborhoods/venues) and social media to recruit for their studies (Bauermeister, Ventuneac, Pingel, & Parsons, 2012; Elford, Bolding, Davis, Sherr, & Hart, 2004; Fernandez et al, 2004; Hernandez-Romieu et al, 2014; Hightow-Weidman et al, 2015; Hirshfield et al, 2004; Lelutiu-Weinberger et al, 2014; Mitchell & Petroll, 2013; Pachankis et al, 2014; Parsons et al., 2013; Raymond et al, 2010; Siegler et al, 2013; Vial et al, 2014, 2015; Ybarra et al, 2014; Ybarra et al., in press; Young, 2014; Young et al, 2014). Yet, studies have shown that samples recruited via the Internet versus venue-based sampling differ in terms of substance use and sexual behavior (Grov, Rendina, & Parsons, 2014; Hernandez-Romieu et al, 2014; Parsons et al, 2013; Raymond et al, 2010; Vial et al, 2014).…”

A Comparison of Three Online Recruitment Strategies for Engaging Parents

“…Most previous research has compared online recruitment methods to offline recruitment methods (e.g., Riva, Teruzzi, & Anolli, 2003; Vial, Starks, & Parsons, 2015; Ward, Clark, Zabriskie, & Morris, 2014), with limited methodological discussion around online research methods (Fielding, Lee, & Blank, 2008). The technology tools available to accomplish recruitment goals include basic resources such as e-mail Listservs, social networking sites, and more sophisticated strategies such as online labor markets.…”

Online-to-offline models in HIV service delivery

“…The potential of social networking sites goes beyond just being a cost-effective tool for recruiting ‘hard-to-reach’ populations into online research studies and in randomized control trials (RCTs) [51]. Promotion O2O models harness their proliferation, and embrace this unprecedented resource to proactively reach and engage vulnerable populations for HIV/sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing scale-up [52].…”

“…The model helps address inaccurate/low HIV risk perceptions, a critical factor behind late diagnosis [51, 67, 68]. Although, highly responsive to WHO’s global call for demand creation [69], the model is resource intensive on the supply side.…”