| 1. Assessment |
|
The target population (African American adolescent females) requires interventions addressing their specific situation
The intervention needs to address safer sex norms, sexual negotiation, and refusal skills, HIV and STIa preventive attitudes
The advisory board was selected for project, met, and provided input on the plan
Advisory board members were paid as consultants to develop or test the feasibility of texting PMIb
|
| 2. Decision |
Selected HORIZONS and Afiya interventions
Decided to adapt Afiya phone-based PMIs to texting PMIs
Original developer of Afiya-led adaptation
mHealthc and texting literature reviewed
|
HORIZONS, an evidence-based intervention that successfully reduced STIs and increased condom use among young women, was selected as it appropriately addressed the target population
Afiya selected as it demonstrated a PMI based on HORIZONS to the same target population, but extend the efficacy of the HORIZONS intervention
Texting is most likely the simplest mHealth adaptation to adapt from Afiya and appropriate implementation technology choice for the target population
|
| 3. Administration |
Decided not to modify Afiya core elements
Decided to focus on Afiya core element support by texts
Adaptation would involve scripts and texts responses based on Afiya documents and data
|
Retention of primary intervention form assured standard of care and served as a shared primary intervention control (therefore, theater testing was not conducted)
5 core elements of Afiya were identified to be supported by PMIs
|
| 4. Production |
Designed 8-week iterative formative pilot plan for adaptation
Designed questionnaires and focus group–led questions
Designed initial texts and support scripts
Selected company for formative pilot texting
Reviewed with Afiya and HORIZONS creators
Reviewed plan with advisory board
Assembled Afiya workshop materials
|
Iterative formative pilot designed for advisory board
Primary intervention led by Afiya and HORIZONS developers in formative pilot and support scripts and associated text messages were created
Important to have both advisory board and intervention developers review pilot design and timing
Important to have intervention developers review PMI scripts and texting form or content (Draft 1 completed)
Texting platforms vary in terms of capacity, functionality, and cost. Total program costs should be estimated
|
| 5. Topical experts |
Obtained review advice regarding HIPAAd issues relevant to texting
Obtained review advice regarding pre- and postintervention CASIe instruments for future effectiveness pilot
Met with texting companies (with advice from ITf) for future effectiveness pilot
|
CASI content should be reviewed for duplication or replication as well as total time required (test run the instrument)
Texting is not encrypted, so both HIPAA (and local IRBg/state) requirements must be reviewed regarding texted data and data privacy issues
Role, functionality, and cost of texting companies were more clearly defined with this experience
Overall costs for the 8-week formative pilot were made
|
| 6. Integration |
Integrated Draft 1 and topical expert comments for scripts, SMS texting content or form (Draft 2)
Conducted Afiya workshop with advisory board
Integrated topical expert comments of pre- and postworkshop CASI materials
Integrated Draft 2 and CASI components (Draft 3)
Final review by advisory board and Afiya and HORIZONS creators
|
|
| 7. Training |
|
|
|
8. Testing
|
|
|
|
Step 1: formative pilot
|
|
|
Conducted 8-week formative pilot with advisory board: primary Afiya intervention, 4-week texting, focus group 1 (adjustments), 4-week texting, focus group 2 (adjustments)
|
Iterative pilot design provided important feedback on texts (timing, wording, dose) as well as script and CASI modifications
Information gathered during the first advisory board focus group was applied to modifying the second 4-week texting session, information gathered during the second 4-week focus group was also useful (topic experts were consulted during these sessions as necessary)
5 personas identified, exit interviews added
Results informed design of adaptation impact pilot
|
|
Step 2: feasibility pilot
|
|
|
|
|