Bridging the Divide: HIV Prevention Research and Black Men Who Have Sex With Men

Andrasik, Michele P.; Chandler, Cristian J; Powell, Borris; Humes, Damon L.; Wakefield, Steven; Kripke, Katharine; Eckstein, Daniel

doi:10.2105/ajph.2013.301653

Cited by 30 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 42 publications

(23 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the 108 studies, 48 studies (44.4%) conducted stakeholder engagement in high‐income countries 5, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70. In contrast, fewer studies conducted stakeholder engagement in middle‐ (30 studies; 27.8%) 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93,...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholder engagement to informHIVclinical trials: a systematic review of the evidence

Day

Blumberg

et al. 2018

J Intern AIDS Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionStakeholder engagement is an essential component of HIV clinical trials. We define stakeholder engagement as an input by individuals or groups with an interest in HIV clinical trials to inform the design or conduct of said trials. Despite its value, stakeholder engagement to inform HIV clinical trials has not been rigorously examined. The purpose of our systematic review is to examine stakeholder engagement for HIV clinical trials and compare it to the recommendations of the UNAIDS/AVAC Good Participatory Practice (GPP) guidelines.MethodsWe used the PRISMA checklist and identified English language studies describing stakeholder engagement to inform HIV clinical trials. Four databases (PubMed, Ovid, CINAHL and Web of Science) and six journals were searched, with additional studies identified using handsearching and expert input. Two independent reviewers examined citations, abstracts and full texts. Data were extracted on country, engagement methods, stakeholder types and purpose of stakeholder engagement. Based on the GPP guidelines, we examined how frequently stakeholder engagement was conducted to inform clinical trial research question development, protocol development, recruitment, enrolment, follow‐up, results and dissemination.Results and discussionOf the 917 citations identified, 108 studies were included in the analysis. Forty‐eight studies (44.4%) described stakeholder engagement in high‐income countries, thirty (27.8%) in middle‐income countries and nine (8.3%) in low‐income countries. Fourteen methods for stakeholder engagement were identified, including individual (e.g. interviews) and group (e.g. community advisory boards) strategies. Thirty‐five types of stakeholders were engaged, with approximately half of the studies (60; 55.6%) engaging HIV‐affected community stakeholders (e.g. people living with HIV, at‐risk or related populations of interest). We observed greater frequency of stakeholder engagement to inform protocol development (49 studies; 45.4%) and trial recruitment (47 studies; 43.5%). Fewer studies described stakeholder engagement to inform post‐trial processes related to trial results (3; 2.8%) and dissemination (11; 10.2%).ConclusionsOur findings identify important directions for future stakeholder engagement research and suggestions for policy. Most notably, we found that stakeholder engagement was more frequently conducted to inform early stages of HIV clinical trials compared to later stages. In order to meet recommendations established in the GPP guidelines, greater stakeholder engagement across all clinical trial stages is needed.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholder engagement to informHIVclinical trials: a systematic review of the evidence

Day

Blumberg

et al. 2018

J Intern AIDS Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies reviewed here called for community-level prevention strategies, including mobilizing the Black community to change stigmatizing views of homosexuality and HIV/AIDS (Andrasik et al, 2014; Beeker et al, 1998; Bird amp; Voisin, 2013; Christian, 2005; Kraft et al, 2000; Stokes amp; Peterson, 1998), promoting community education and advocacy (Beeker et al, 1998; Hawkeswood, 1993; Hawkeswood amp; Costley, 1996; LeGrande et al, 2014; Lichtenstein, 2000; Wilson amp; Moore, 2009), and enhancing cultural awareness among health care providers serving BMSM (Malebranche et al, 2004; Malebranche et al, 2010; Wheeler, 2006; Wilson amp; Moore, 2009). While there is a growing body of literature exploring alternative ways of approaching community-level prevention (Yoshikawa, Wilson, Shinn, amp; Peterson, 2005), the qualitative studies we reviewed here suggest that little work has been conducted on how to implement community-level HIV prevention approaches targeting BMSM.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contributions of Qualitative Research in Informing HIV/AIDS Interventions Targeting Black MSM in the United States

Wilson

Valera

Martos

et al. 2015

The Journal of Sex Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents a systematic review of qualitative studies focusing on the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) among Black men who have sex with men (BMSM) in the United States. We reviewed studies that were published between 1980-2014. Qualitative methods employed in the studies reviewed include: in-depth interviews, focus groups, participant observation, and ethnography. We searched the following databases: PubMed, PsychINFO, JSTOR, ERIC, Sociological Abstracts, and Google Scholar for relevant articles using the following broad terms: “Black men” and/or “BMSM,” and “qualitative” and/or “ethnography.” Seventy studies were included in this review. The key themes observed across studies were: (1) heterogeneity, (2) layered stigma and intersectionality, (3) risk behaviors, (4) mental health, (5) resilience, and (6) community engagement. The review suggests that sexual behavior and HIV-status disclosure, sexual risk-taking, substance use, and psychological well-being were contextually situated. Interventions occurring at multiple levels and within multiple contexts are needed to reduce stigma within the Black community. Similarly, structural interventions targeting religious groups, schools, and health care systems are needed to improve the health outcomes among BMSM. Community engagement and using community-based participatory research methods may facilitate the development and implementation of culturally appropriate HIV/AIDS interventions targeting BMSM.

show abstract

“…Finally, some patients may also have doubts about the validity of clinical data for the use of PrEP in specific patient groups. Black MSM, cisgender women, and transgender women have been reluctant to participate in clinical research, and consequently are underrepresented in clinical trials [71][72][73]. One study found that lack of data on PrEP in specific populations was a barrier to PrEP uptake [50].…”

Section: Provider Bias and Distrust Of Healthcare Providers/ Systems mentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers to the Wider Use of Pre-exposure Prophylaxis in the United States: A Narrative Review

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Antiretroviral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV transmission was first approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2012. Despite correlations of decreases in new HIV infections being greatest where PrEP has been deployed, the uptake of PrEP is lagging, particularly among populations with disproportionate HIV burden. This narrative review seeks to identify individual and systemic barriers to PrEP usage in the USA. A comprehensive search of recent literature uncovered a complex array of structural, social, clinical, and behavioral barriers, including knowledge/awareness of PrEP, perception of HIV risk, stigma from healthcare providers or family/partners/friends, distrust of healthcare providers/systems, access to PrEP, costs of PrEP, and concerns around PrEP side effects/medication interactions. Importantly, these barriers may have different effects on specific populations at risk. The full potential of PrEP for HIV prevention will not be realized until these issues are addressed. Strategies to achieve this goal should include educational interventions, innovative approaches to delivery of HIV care, financial support, and destigmatization of PrEP and PrEP users. Until then, PrEP uptake will continue to be suboptimal, particularly among those who need it most.

show abstract

Bridging the Divide: HIV Prevention Research and Black Men Who Have Sex With Men

Cited by 30 publications

References 42 publications

Stakeholder engagement to informHIVclinical trials: a systematic review of the evidence

Stakeholder engagement to informHIVclinical trials: a systematic review of the evidence

Contributions of Qualitative Research in Informing HIV/AIDS Interventions Targeting Black MSM in the United States

Barriers to the Wider Use of Pre-exposure Prophylaxis in the United States: A Narrative Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About