No one listens to us, we know this, so we participated: Qualitative evidence from menstruation research during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Eleanor J Junkins, Samar Chehab, Katharine Mn Lee, Kathryn Bh Clancy
{"title":"No one listens to us, we know this, so we participated: Qualitative evidence from menstruation research during the COVID-19 pandemic.","authors":"Eleanor J Junkins, Samar Chehab, Katharine Mn Lee, Kathryn Bh Clancy","doi":"10.1177/17455057241285189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We created a survey to assess menstrual side effects after COVID-19 vaccination when we noticed news stories that denied or discounted the experiences of tens of thousands of menstruating and formerly menstruating people who reported experiencing bleeding changes. This survey had an unprecedented response hundreds of times higher than we had anticipated (<i>n</i> = 101,824).</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We investigated what motivated our sample to participate without remuneration to understand both general motivations for survey participation as well as why this survey captured the interest of so many.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>We used open-ended responses from our online, mixed-method survey collected from April to October 2021.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using computer-assisted qualitative data analysis tools in R, we conducted a thematic analysis on open-ended responses. We used topic modeling to cluster the data, synthesize responses across 22,737 participants, and inform the themes summarizing the responses to \"What is your interest in this project?\" We compared and contrasted responses across groups (racial identity, ethnicity, gender) to examine whether the themes were representative across the demographic groups in our study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The themes that characterized participants' interest in participating were vaccine effects and women's/people's health, personal experience related to the vaccine, and a love for science and data. We compared responses among demographic subgroups to avoid an overfocus on majority group responses and found the themes were reflected across each group. Lastly, we found our themes reflected multiple types of altruism.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results were important in showing how emergent research that focuses on the concerns of potential participants can encourage high response rates from both marginalized and majority communities. Inclusive practices and familiarity with the research team built credibility that engendered trust with the public.</p>","PeriodicalId":75327,"journal":{"name":"Women's health (London, England)","volume":"20 ","pages":"17455057241285189"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11465293/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Women's health (London, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17455057241285189","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: We created a survey to assess menstrual side effects after COVID-19 vaccination when we noticed news stories that denied or discounted the experiences of tens of thousands of menstruating and formerly menstruating people who reported experiencing bleeding changes. This survey had an unprecedented response hundreds of times higher than we had anticipated (n = 101,824).

Objectives: We investigated what motivated our sample to participate without remuneration to understand both general motivations for survey participation as well as why this survey captured the interest of so many.

Design: We used open-ended responses from our online, mixed-method survey collected from April to October 2021.

Methods: Using computer-assisted qualitative data analysis tools in R, we conducted a thematic analysis on open-ended responses. We used topic modeling to cluster the data, synthesize responses across 22,737 participants, and inform the themes summarizing the responses to "What is your interest in this project?" We compared and contrasted responses across groups (racial identity, ethnicity, gender) to examine whether the themes were representative across the demographic groups in our study.

Results: The themes that characterized participants' interest in participating were vaccine effects and women's/people's health, personal experience related to the vaccine, and a love for science and data. We compared responses among demographic subgroups to avoid an overfocus on majority group responses and found the themes were reflected across each group. Lastly, we found our themes reflected multiple types of altruism.

Conclusion: These results were important in showing how emergent research that focuses on the concerns of potential participants can encourage high response rates from both marginalized and majority communities. Inclusive practices and familiarity with the research team built credibility that engendered trust with the public.

没有人听我们的,我们知道这一点,所以我们参与了:COVID-19 大流行期间月经研究的定性证据。
背景:当我们注意到一些新闻报道否认或贬低数以万计的月经期和曾有月经期的人所经历的出血变化时,我们发起了一项调查,以评估接种 COVID-19 疫苗后的月经副作用。这次调查得到了前所未有的响应,比我们预期的高出数百倍(n = 101,824):我们对样本无偿参与调查的动机进行了调查,以了解参与调查的一般动机以及为什么这项调查吸引了这么多人的兴趣:设计:我们使用了 2021 年 4 月至 10 月收集的在线混合方法调查中的开放式回答:使用 R 中的计算机辅助定性数据分析工具,我们对开放式回复进行了主题分析。我们使用主题建模对数据进行聚类,对 22737 名参与者的回答进行综合,并对 "您对本项目的兴趣是什么?"的回答进行主题归纳。我们对不同群体(种族身份、民族、性别)的回答进行了比较和对比,以考察这些主题在我们的研究中是否具有代表性:结果:参与者参与兴趣的主题是疫苗效应和妇女/人民健康、与疫苗相关的个人经历以及对科学和数据的热爱。我们比较了不同人口亚群的回答,以避免过度关注多数群体的回答,结果发现这些主题在每个群体中都有所反映。最后,我们发现我们的主题反映了多种类型的利他主义:这些结果非常重要,说明了关注潜在参与者关注点的新兴研究如何能够鼓励边缘化群体和多数群体的高响应率。包容性的做法和对研究团队的熟悉建立了可信度,从而赢得了公众的信任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信