METHODS: We conducted cognitive interviews (n = 645) in three iterative waves of data collection across 19 countries during March 2022-March 2023, with participants of diverse sex, gender, age and geography. Interviewers used a semi-structured field guide to elicit narratives from participants about their questionnaire item interpretation and response processes. Local study teams completed data analysis frameworks, and we conducted joint analysis meetings between data collection waves to identify question failures.
FINDINGS: Overall, we observed that participants were willing to respond to even the most sensitive questionnaire items on sexual biography and practices. We identified issues with the original questionnaire that (i) affected the willingness (acceptability) and ability (knowledge barriers) of participants to respond fully; and/or (ii) prevented participants from interpreting the questions as intended, including poor wording (source question error), cultural portability and very rarely translation error. Our revisions included adjusting item order and wording, adding preambles and implementation guidance, and removing items with limited cultural portability.
CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated that a questionnaire exploring sexual practices, experiences and health-related outcomes can be comprehensible and acceptable by the general population in diverse global contexts, and have highlighted the importance of rigorous processes for the translation and cognitive testing of such a questionnaire.
METHODS: Consortium research teams conducted online surveys in 30 countries. Sampling methods included convenience, online panels, and population-representative. Primary outcomes included sexual behaviors, partner violence, and SRH service use, and we compared 3 months prior to and during policy measures to mitigate COVID-19. We conducted meta-analyses for primary outcomes and graded the certainty of the evidence.
RESULTS: Among 4546 respondents with casual partners, condom use stayed the same for 3374 (74.4%), and 640 (14.1%) reported a decline. Fewer respondents reported physical or sexual partner violence during COVID-19 measures (1063 of 15 144, 7.0%) compared to before COVID-19 measures (1469 of 15 887, 9.3%). COVID-19 measures impeded access to condoms (933 of 10 790, 8.7%), contraceptives (610 of 8175, 7.5%), and human immunodeficiency virus/sexually transmitted infection (HIV/STI) testing (750 of 1965, 30.7%). Pooled estimates from meta-analysis indicate that during COVID-19 measures, 32.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.9%-42.1%) of people needing HIV/STI testing had hindered access, 4.4% (95% CI, 3.4%-5.4%) experienced partner violence, and 5.8% (95% CI, 5.4%-8.2%) decreased casual partner condom use (moderate certainty of evidence for each outcome). Meta-analysis findings were robust in sensitivity analyses that examined country income level, sample size, and sampling strategy.
CONCLUSIONS: Open science methods are feasible to organize research studies as part of emergency responses. The initial COVID-19 wave impacted SRH behaviors and access to services across diverse global settings.