Mixed-Method Evaluation of Social Media-Based Tools and Traditional Strategies to Recruit High-Risk and Hard-to-Reach Populations into an HIV Prevention Intervention Study

Abstract

Men who have sex with men and transgender women are hard-to-reach populations for research. Social media-based tools may overcome certain barriers in accessing these groups and are being tested in an ongoing study exploring HIV home-test kit use to reduce risk behavior. We analyzed pre-screening responses about how volunteers learned about the study (n = 896) and demographic data from eligible participants who came for an initial study visit (n = 216) to determine the strengths and weaknesses of recruitment strategies. Social media-based strategies resulted in the highest number of individuals screened (n = 444, 26% eligible). Dating sites/apps reached large numbers of eligible participants. White-Hispanics and African-Americans were more likely to be recruited through personal contacts; community events successfully reached Hispanic volunteers. Incorporating recruitment queries into pre-screening forms can help modify recruitment strategies for greater efficacy and efficiency. Findings suggest that recruitment strategies need to be tailored to reach specific target populations.

Recruitment of US Adolescents and Young Adults (AYA) into Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)–Related Behavioral Research Studies: A Scoping Review

“…Study Purpose When categorizing studies as per the national HIV initiative to end the HIV epidemic (HIV prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and outbreak response), five recruited participants for HIV prevention [11,[23][24][25][26][27]. Rapid HIV testing [25] and antiretroviral (ARV) adherence support for HIV treatment regimens [28] represented additional study goals. None of these seven studies recruited as part of research directed to HIV outbreak response.…”

“…Study Design Five of the seven studies were randomized clinical trials [11,[23][24][25]27], and two described recruitment for cross-sectional studies [26,28]. New York City was a geographic location for participant recruitment, either as an exclusive site [11,26] or as part of a recruitment strategy for one or more sites [25,27]. Other geographic recruitment locations were Chicago [23], Los Angeles [24], or exclusive to online social media sites [28].…”

“…HIV-seropositive status was an inclusion criterion for one of the seven studies [28]. Other studies recruited HIV-seronegative participants [23][24][25]27] or both HIV-negative and -positive participants. Three studies limited their samples to men who have sex with men and/or transgender women [11,23,26] and one study was limited to female participants only [27].…”

“…Recruitment results varied with race/ethnicity. Two studies reported majority Black/African American samples [25,27], one reported a majority Hispanic/Latino sample [26], and three a majority White sample [11,23,28]. Researchers of one study did not report on race/ethnicity [24].…”

“…A summary of recruitment methods and associated advantages and disadvantages is presented in Table 2. In total, six studies used venue-based sampling at specific locations from lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community centers [23] and drop-in centers for homeless youth [24] to bars, clubs [11,25,26], and shopping venues [27]. Online recruitment ranged from email invitation [23] to advertising on specific websites such as Facebook, Twitter, Craigslist, and datingspecific websites [11,[25][26][27][28].…”