Abstract
Background: Because of a growing older population, the sexual health (SH) of older adults, including sexual violence (SV), is becoming an increasingly important public health concern. Yet, reliable SV prevalence rates and risk factors are lacking, due to methodological shortcomings in current studies. SV research involves challenges regarding safety and disclosure, especially in older adults. In this paper we reflect on the methods used in a SH&V study in older adults balancing between GDPR imposed privacy rules and ethical and safety guidelines. Methods: To ensure the acceptability of the questionnaire, it was tested in a two-phase pilot study. To maximise SV disclosure, the questionnaire built up gradually towards the more sensitive SV modules. Interviewers were trained to approach participants in a non-judgemental manner. Due to GDPR, our data collection method was changed from a random sampling via the National Register to a cluster random probability sampling with a random route finding approach. Results: Older adults were willing to discuss SH&V during a face-to-face interview with trained interviewers. Following strict safety guidelines, no major incidents were reported. The cluster random probability sampling with random route finding approach provided an adequate sampling frame, but was inefficient and time-consuming. Conclusion: Doing research on SH&V in older adults is feasible, but requires a substantial investment of time and the challenges involved may incur greater costs. Research institutions, donors, and policy makers should convene to investigate how problems related to GDPR can be solved, especially regarding research on sensitive topics and hard to reach populations.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research was supported in part by the Belgian Federal Science Policy Research through Interdisciplinary Networks funding scheme, grant number BR/175/A/UN−MENAMAIS. CV's contribution was supported in part by the Research Foundation−Flanders (FWO) Postdoctoral Fellowship funding scheme, grant numbers 12C0616N, 12C0619N. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data, in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval was obtained by the ethical committee of Ghent University/Ghent University Hospital on the 21th of November 2018 (Belgian registration number B670201837542). The study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
By request from the corresponding author.
