2 research outputs found

    Collecting mortality data via mobile phone surveys: A non-inferiority randomized trial in Malawi

    Get PDF
    Despite the urgent need for timely mortality data in low-income and lower-middle-income countries, mobile phone surveys rarely include questions about recent deaths. Such questions might a) be too sensitive, b) take too long to ask and/or c) generate unreliable data. We assessed the feasibility of mortality data collection using mobile phone surveys in Malawi. We conducted a non-inferiority trial among a random sample of mobile phone users. Participants were allocated to an interview about their recent economic activity or recent deaths in their family. In the group that was asked mortality-related questions, half of the respondents completed an abridged questionnaire, focused on information necessary to calculate recent mortality rates, whereas the other half completed an extended questionnaire that also included questions about symptoms and healthcare. The primary trial outcome was the cooperation rate, i.e., the number of completed interviews divided by the number of mobile subscribers invited to participate. Secondary outcomes included self-reports of negative feelings and stated intentions to participate in future interviews. We called more than 7,000 unique numbers and reached 3,054 mobile subscribers. In total, 1,683 mobile users were invited to participate. The difference in cooperation rates between those asked to complete a mortality-related interview and those asked to answer questions about economic activity was 0.9 percentage points (95% CI = -2.3, 4.1), which satisfied the non-inferiority criterion. The mortality questionnaire was non-inferior to the economic questionnaire on all secondary outcomes. Collecting mortality data required 2 to 4 additional minutes per reported death, depending on the inclusion of questions about symptoms and healthcare. More than half of recent deaths elicited during mobile phone interviews had not been registered with the National Registration Bureau. Including mortality-related questions in mobile phone surveys is feasible. It might help strengthen the surveillance of mortality in countries with deficient civil registration systems. Registration: AEA RCT Registry, #0008065 (14 September 2021).</jats:p

    Breaking ground in cross-cultural research on the fear of being laughed at (gelotophobia): A multi-national study involving 73 countries

    Get PDF
    The current study examines whether the fear of being laughed at (gelotophobia) can be assessed reliably and validly by means of a self-report instrument in different countries of the world. All items of the GELOPH (Ruch and Titze, GELOPH46, University of DĂŒsseldorf, 1998; Ruch and Proyer, Swiss Journal of Psychology 67:19–27, 2008b) were translated to the local language of the collaborator (42 languages in total). In total, 22,610 participants in 93 samples from 73 countries completed the GELOPH. Across all samples the reliability of the 15-item questionnaire was high (mean alpha of .85) and in all samples the scales appeared to be unidimensional. The endorsement rates for the items ranged from 1.31% through 80.00% to a single item. Variations in the mean scores of the items were more strongly related to the culture in a country and not to the language in which the data were collected. This was also supported by a multidimensional scaling analysis with standardized mean scores of the items from the GELOPH15. This analysis identified two dimensions that further helped explaining the data (i.e., insecure vs. intense avoidant-restrictive and low vs. high suspicious tendencies towards the laughter of others). Furthermore, multiple samples derived from one country tended to be (with a few exceptions) highly similar. The study shows that gelotophobia can be assessed reliably by means of a self-report instrument in cross-cultural research. This study enables further studies of the fear of being laughed at with regard to differences in the prevalence and putative causes of gelotophobia in comparisons to different cultures
    corecore