ABSTRACT
Background: Many clinical and population-based research studies pivoted from in-person assessments to phone-based surveys due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The impact of these transitions on survey response remains understudied, especially for people living with HIV. Given that there are gender-specific trends in alcohol and substance use, it is particularly important to capture these data for women.
Objective: Identify factors associated with responding to an alcohol and substance use phone survey administered during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Women’s Interagency HIV Study, a multicenter US prospective cohort of women living with and without HIV.
Methods: We used multivariable logistic regression to assess for associations of pre-pandemic (April–September 2019) sociodemographic factors, HIV status, housing status, depressive symptoms, alcohol use, and substance use with response to an early-pandemic (August–September 2020) phone survey.
Results: Of 1,847 women who attended an in-person visit in 2019, 78% responded to a phone survey during the pandemic. The odds of responding were lower for women of Hispanic ethnicity (aOR 0.47 95% CI 0.33–0.66, ref=Black/African American) and those who reported substance use (aOR 0.63 95% CI 0.41–0.98). By contrast, the odds were higher for White women (aOR 1.64 95% CI 1.02–2.70, ref=Black/African American) and those with stable housing (aOR 1.74 95% CI 1.24–2.43).
Conclusions: Pivoting from an in-person to phone-administered alcohol and substance use survey may lead to underrepresentation of key subpopulations of women who are often neglected in substance use and HIV research. As remote survey methods become more common, investigators need to ensure that the study population is representative of the target population.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of the study participants and dedication of the staff at the MWCCS sites.
Author contributions
HRT, PCT, JCP, and YM contributed the original concept and design of the study. MCK, DLJ, LFC, AAA, AC, ALF, ABS, JD, AS, JCP, PCT were involved in data collection. YM and HRT performed data analysis and all authors interpreted the data. HRT drafted the manuscript. PCT and JCP are responsible for project supervision. All authors have critically revised this article and approved the final version to be published.
Disclosure statement
RJD has received consulting fees from the Department of Defense, Morehouse School of Medicine, Benten Technologies, and Northwell Health. AAA has received consulting fees from Merck and Gilead; Merck and Gilead have provided her institution with funding for her research. AS has received consulting fees from Gilead; Gilead has provided her institution with funding for her research. Gilead, Merck, and Abbvie have provided JCP’s institution with funding for her research. Merck and Gilead have provided PCT’s institution with funding for her research. JAH has received consulting fees from Pear Therapeutics. The other authors have no conflicts of interest.
Data availability statement
Access to individual-level data from the MWCCS may be obtained upon review and approval of a MWCCS concept sheet. Links and instructions for online concept sheet submission are on the study website (http://mwccs.org/).
Correction Statement
This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.