2/21/2023 Article Critique 1

Article Title: Ethnographic Process Evaluation:

Piloting an HIV Prevention Intervention
Programs among Injection Drug Users

California State University of San Bernardino

Christina Marquez
Spring MPH Program: HSCI 6260
Dr. Salome Kapella Mshigeni
Introduction

Due to the insufficient information and data collected, this research was conducted based on a
higher-risk population in Baltimore, Maryland. The study aims for HIV / Aid intervention with
programs meant to relate to and fit that population's cultural needs for a successful outcome.
The people at higher risk of HIV/ AIDS are male African Americans (Hong, Y., 2005). Newspaper
ads, flyers, word of mouth, and outreach will recruit participants. Their research will apply
theory to support the statement that social network plays a role in influencing risk behaviors.
Their goal for outreach depends on successful intervention for participants to spread the word
to social networks to reduce risky behaviors, depending on people, not health educators, to be
a positive influence. The study will be piloted, and process evaluated within a time frame of July
2003- Jan. 2004.

Piloting and process evaluation on HIV prevention intervention

Piloting can be essential in an early research stage because this can correct errors and
strengthen your research on a larger scale. Some examples of piloting importance or benefits
are feedback, observing, planning, timeline, goals, actions, evaluation of tools, and a sample of
a final research report. The other reason to pilot is to conduct a process evaluation to see the
intervention's effectiveness on the population and have most questions answered while also
assessing the community and its culture or reality. Also, at the beginning of the research, it is
essential to add, remove, and adjust programs or even communication skills to relate to
community targeting to save resources and gain the attention of potential stakeholders. One
problem they faced in piloting was translating words, feelings, and thoughts into data. During
this process evaluation, there will be questions to answer and correct some errors or flaws in
the intervention. Also, can help create questionnaires or surveys that can be translated into
data by finding participants' common traits.
Methodology

Methods used ethnographic collecting qualitative data by observation and deep analyzing
participants' daily activities with interviewing. Social influence theory is based on participants
being influenced and aware of the judgment of others and acceptance by social groups. The
focus was to pilot a cohort of training sessions in communication using; STEP, a training tool
used to communicate; it was created as a framework for applying steps while interacting with
peers around them. Each letter had a significant meaning to describe actions and feeling to
motivate healthy behaviors. Also, individual and group sessions are allowed o to bring a drug of
choice or partner. The step tool method was piloted within at least five cohorts and took at
least A Year from July 03 -Jan 04. IRB approved piloting at John Hopkin University of Public
Health. Some variables were used; age 18 or older, gender, race/ethnicity, location/ zip code,
usage of drugs, sexually active, and a timeframe within three months.

Results
Results of piloting the HIV prevention intervention program with a process evaluation their
goals were to fill some gaps in doing research and intervention in the streets for more accurate
data and observation. They also collected some data in a controlled setting to compare the
difference. Some strengths highlighted were process evaluation(problems), strategic design
planning, a plan of systematic strategies for evaluation (goals, activities, timelines, questions),
and assessment. Also, results were documented in a database to share and communicate with
the team about the recent activity (internal) and a data grid to document sessions, outreach,
and interviews (external). There were some limitations; timeframes gave them fewer data.
Also, outreach in the streets made collecting data (interviews) difficult compared to a training
session in a controlled environment. they need to mention why these results came upon. Still,
an educational theory would be that asking people on the streets about drug use can create
fear that they can be arrested for having drug paraphernalia.
Process Evaluation Content

Process Evaluation content data were collected through observations, interviews (audiotape),
and voluntary participant documentation. The location was Baltimore, Maryland, among the
population of sexually active and drug users with needles. A barrier between facilitators
implementing the program was miscommunication; for example., the word "partner” purpose
was not only applied to sexual but to drug partners. The activities in the program were set up to
target drug users that specifically inject using needles, mainly through altering the
communication to educate on safe drug splitting methods, cleaning needles, norm- ject, and
condom usage. Facilitators collected feedback after sessions from participants; they would
also document statements made by people when they try to share their knowledge and
encouragement with a social network or partners. Researchers (Ethnographers) would go into
society and follow participants to observe daily life practices after an intervention. The purpose
was for them to note if the intervention was changing their behavior and reducing risk in drug
practices. An example can be them educating a peer about cleaning needles properly.

2 things liked about article

Something new was learned; there are three common research methods Qualitative,
Quantitative, and Mix Method Research; however, in Qualitative research, there can be design,
and the ethnographic method is one of the five. It is categorized in this because it depends on
the focus of study (cultural similarities in the group), problem (explain and use similar patterns
the group shares), discipline (sociology/anthropology), and analysis ( studying of similarity in
culture) ( Ortlieb, 2021). also, I like that they collected surveys and interviews outside, not just
in a controlled environment. The research feels more surreal. I enjoyed reading about the
compassion and experience the researchers had, even adjusting the communication to relate to
the culture and sample. For example, S stands for "stand up and be positive"; they adjust to
people liking "sometimes you gotta go hard" (Hong, Y, 2005). In some cultures, being more
assertive works more in favor of a lighter form of communication.
2 things you did not like about this article

It had two topics in the research HIV and drug use. I understand they were trying to relate it in
the same category as risky behaviors, but when it came to intervention, they were dealing with
two different population cultures. Even though both depend on risky behaviors, the questions
are additional; I can see how they might see drug users' connection with sex as increasing the
risk of HIV. Understanding the people is key; asking a drug user too many questions in an
interview is too stressful. Either focus on questions regarding needle usage, drug use, and how
they shoot up. I think sex, condoms, and partners should be separate. Think about that person's
time, life, and thought process to get a good outcome in the intervention.
 Resources

Hong, Y. Mitchell, G. S., Peterson, A. J., (2005). Ethnographic Process Evaluation: Piloting and
HIV Prevention Intervention Program among Injection Drug Users. International Journal
of Qualitative methods Volume 4, Issue 1. Pages 1-86.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/epub/10.1177/160940690500400101.

Ortlieb, E. (2021). 5 types of Qualitative Research Design. YouTube.

https://youtu.be/H45UCgcfLC8.