Response to OMB

Response to Julie Wise comments:

1. We are sending this back as improperly submitted.  Part A states that, “The information obtained from the proposed data collection will be used to inform CDC, policy makers, prevention practitioners and researchers about audience receptivity and the potential effects of campaign messages as they are developed.” It is not clear from the information provided, how this second purpose will be achieved. 

The second purpose will be achieved by ensuring maximum representation from HIV-negative gay and bisexual men, particularly those at higher risk of acquiring HIV, and assessing key theoretical constructs (attitudes, norms, intent and behavior change) that may influence communication with their sexual partners.

2. Also, the screener contains many items that appear to be unnecessary for identifying a respondent as eligible or not (gay or bisexual; male).  These collections are not meant to be a vehicle to collect as much descriptive information as possible – each data element must serve a purpose and have utility for meeting the stated goals of the collection. Specifically, it is not clear why questions beginning on page 6 of the screener are necessary.

Campaign messages are intended to reach a broad audience of MSM with a priority audience of higher risk HIV-negative gay and bisexual men. The questions in the screening instrument beginning on page 6 are necessary to ensure representation from this priority audience, while also including.

• Questions on HIV testing history are included to ensure representation of men who have never been tested for HIV, men who have not been tested recently, and HIV-positive men.

• Questions on number of current main and recent non-main male partners are included to exclude gay and bisexual men with no sexual partners within the past 12 months (considered lowest risk and non-priority audience for purposes of this campaign).

• Questions about communication with sexual partners about risk and prevention topics are included to ensure representation from men with current or recent sexual partners who are currently not communicating about these topics.

There are several questions from the screener that were moved to the main survey instrument. These questions are meant to develop a more detailed risk profile to compare reactions to the campaign messages and to ensure representation of men in low, medium and higher risk categories. Placement into risk categories is determined by responses to multiple questions to assess number of sexual partners, concurrent sexual activity, serodiscordant relationship status, unprotected anal sex, and communication about HIV status. For example, the combination of both main and non-main partnerships within the last 12 months, unprotected sex and non-disclosure of HIV status by the respondent or his partner(s) would place someone in a high risk category as well as into a key priority segment for prevention messages.

3. Without seeing the actual ads (these will need to be provided) and absent a more detailed description in the supporting documents, it is not clear what the utility is of the questions in the instrument starting on page 13.

The campaign messages and ads that will be used for testing are included as an attachment. To be sensitive of time but still get sufficient feedback, these ads will be rotated so that not every participant views all of the ads. The questions in the instrument starting on page 13 are necessary to inform the development and evaluation of the messages designed to influence the targeted behavior change, namely communication with sexual partners about HIV-related risk behaviors and prevention strategies. These questions assess theoretical constructs such as attitudes, norms, intent and self-efficacy related to communication with sexual partners to enable us to understand the communication behaviors of our survey participants and how these constructs are associated with message receptivity.