Search

It is challenging to quantitatively measure the health vulnerability and risk factors of refugees and migrants residing outside of formal settlement settings. For hard-to-reach populations without available sampling frames, researchers have increasingly turned to novel sampling and statistical methods, like respondent-driven sampling (RDS). "Standard" RDS is typically conducted face-to-face at fixed sites. However, during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, face-to-face survey methods and recruitment approaches posed high potential risk of virus transmission and infection, making remote RDS approaches optimal. In this paper, we explore the feasibility of implementing telephone and Internet RDS strategies to assess challenges faced by Venezuelan refugees and migrants in the city of Bogotá, Colombia's capital, and the department of Norte de Santander, the main Venezuelan-Colombian border crossing site. We describe RDS assumptions, survey design, formative research, and the implementation of both strategies and present diagnostics for determining whether assumptions are met. Phone-based recruitment strategies in both locations and the Internet strategy in Bogotá achieved their calculated sample size; however, the Internet strategy in Norte de Santander did not. Most RDS assumptions were sufficiently met at sites where sample sizes were reached. These surveys provide valuable lessons for implementing innovative remote strategies with which to study hard-to-reach populations such as refugees and migrants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to the rapidly evolving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the All of Us Research Program longitudinal cohort study developed the COVID-19 Participant Experience (COPE) survey to better understand the pandemic experiences and health impacts of COVID-19 on diverse populations within the United States. Six survey versions were deployed between May 2020 and March 2021, covering mental health, loneliness, activity, substance use, and discrimination, as well as COVID-19 symptoms, testing, treatment, and vaccination. A total of 104,910 All of Us Research Program participants, of whom over 73% were from communities traditionally underrepresented in biomedical research, completed 275,201 surveys; 9,693 completed all 6 surveys. Response rates varied widely among demographic groups and were lower among participants from certain racial and ethnic minority populations, participants with low income or educational attainment, and participants with a Spanish language preference. Survey modifications improved participant response rates between the first and last surveys (13.9% to 16.1%, P  < 0.001). This paper describes a data set with longitudinal COVID-19 survey data in a large, diverse population that will enable researchers to address important questions related to the pandemic, a data set that is of additional scientific value when combined with the program's other data sources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Qualitative research methods, while rising in popularity, are still a relatively underutilized tool in public health research. Usually reserved for small samples, qualitative research techniques have the potential to enhance insights gained from large questionnaires and cohort studies, both deepening the interpretation of quantitative data and generating novel hypotheses that might otherwise be missed by standard approaches; this is especially true where exposures and outcomes are new, understudied, or rapidly changing, as in a pandemic. However, methods for the conduct of qualitative research within large samples are underdeveloped. Here, we describe a novel method of applying qualitative research methods to free-text comments collected in a large epidemiologic questionnaire. Specifically, this method includes: 1) a hierarchical system of coding through content analysis; 2) a qualitative data management application; and 3) an adaptation of Cohen's κ and percent agreement statistics for use by a team of coders, applying multiple codes per record from a large codebook. The methods outlined in this paper may help direct future applications of qualitative and mixed methods within large cohort studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]