Formative Work and Community Engagement Approaches for Implementing an HIV Intervention in Botswana Schools

Miller, Kim S.; Cham, Haddi Jatou; Taylor, Ellen; Berrier, Faith L.; Duffy, Meghan A.; Vig, Jessica; Chipazi, Lily; Chakalisa, Chawada; Sidibe, Sekou; Swart, Kenau; Tau, Nontobeko Sylvia; Clark, Leslie F.

doi:10.2105/ajph.2016.303225

Cited by 3 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Both studies were conducted after 2010. We also assessed of the extent of youth engagement over time by comparing engagement in studies conducted in or before 2010 [19,20,22,23,25‐27,31,33,34,39‐41,45‐48,52‐54,59,60,66,68,72,73,77,78,80,82,83,88,89,109,115,121,130], to studies conducted after 2010 [21,24,28‐30,32,35‐37,42‐44,50,51,56‐58,60,62‐64,67,69‐71,75,76,79,81,84‐86,90,100,110,111,129]. We found youth engagement in 28 out of 37 interventions (76%) conducted in or before 2010, and in 30 out of 37 interventions (81%) conducted after 2010.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…About three‐quarters of studies (56, 76%) had no youth engagement activity at the post‐intervention phase [21,25‐27,29‐33,35,36,39,42,45‐47,49,51‐54,56‐89,129].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Following our secondary search for studies that described the interventions identified, we found 27 additional manuscripts. Thus, the total number of manuscripts reviewed was 112 [19‐130]. These manuscripts described 74 unique intervention research studies (Table 1) […”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moderate youth engagement was identified in six interventions (8%) whereby youth, under supervision, were empowered to decide how to deliver intervention components, implying shared decision making with adults (Video S1 abstract) [22‐27]. Most interventions (48, 65%) had minimal engagement, with youth having no decision‐making power [28‐65,67‐72,75,87,90,130], and some interventions (17, 23%) had no engagement at any phase of research [66,73,74,76‐86,88,89,129].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fourteen interventions (19%) had minimal youth engagement at the pre-intervention phase [28,31,33,35,36,43,45,49,54,59,60,67,71,87]. These interventions used youth advisory boards or committees (3, 4%) [59,67], photovoice (1, 1%) [28], focus group discussions (10, 14%) [28,31,33,35,43,45,54,60,71,87], qualitative interviews (4, 5%) [36,43,60,87], and surveys (3, 4%) [28,45,49], to get youth's views and opinions, or areas of focus for intervention. In as much as the youth were consulted through these aforementioned mechanisms, it was unclear the extent to which youth opinions shaped final decisions with regards to research components or outcomes.…”

Section: Pre-intervention Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Youth engagement in HIV prevention intervention research in sub‐Saharan Africa: a scoping review

Asuquo

Tahlil

Muessig

et al. 2021

J. Intern. AIDS Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Youth engagement in HIV research is generally recognized as essential, but often neglected or minimally implemented in practice. Engagement is a process of working collaboratively with diverse groups of people to address common issues. We conducted a scoping review of youth HIV prevention interventions in sub‐Saharan Africa to identify and categorize forms and levels of youth engagement across the lifespan of intervention research. Methods We followed Arksey and O'Malley's framework for organizing a scoping review. We searched seven databases for related articles on identified intervention studies through May 28 th 2020. Included studies focused on youth (10 to 24 years old) HIV prevention interventions in sub‐Saharan Africa. Two reviewers independently examined citations and full manuscripts for inclusion. Data were extracted on study characteristics, location, description of youth engagement and extent of engagement. Youth engagement approaches were categorized based on Hart’s ladder as substantial engagement (strong youth decision‐making power), moderate engagement (shared decision making with adults), minimal engagement (no youth decision‐making power) or no engagement. Results We identified 3149 citations and included 112 studies reporting on 74 unique HIV interventions. Twenty‐two interventions were in low‐income countries, 49 in middle‐income countries, and three were in both. Overall, only nine interventions (12%) had substantial or moderate youth engagement, two‐thirds (48, 65%) had minimal youth engagement and 17 interventions (23%) had no youth engagement. We also identified specific engagement strategies (e.g. youth‐led research, crowdsourcing) that were feasible in multiple settings and resulted in substantial engagement. Conclusions We found limited youth engagement in youth HIV prevention intervention studies in sub‐Saharan Africa. However, several activities resulted in substantial youth engagement and could be relevant in many low‐and‐middle‐income‐country (LMIC) settings.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…About three‐quarters of studies (56, 76%) had no youth engagement activity at the post‐intervention phase [21,25‐27,29‐33,35,36,39,42,45‐47,49,51‐54,56‐89,129].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Pre-intervention Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Youth engagement in HIV prevention intervention research in sub‐Saharan Africa: a scoping review

Asuquo

Tahlil

Muessig

et al. 2021

J. Intern. AIDS Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Correlates of attendance at community engagement meetings held in advance of bio-behavioral research studies: A longitudinal, sociocentric social network study in rural Uganda

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Community engagement is central to the conduct of health-related research studies as a way to determine priorities, inform study design and implementation, increase recruitment and retention, build relationships, and ensure that research meets the goals of the community. Community sensitization meetings, a form of community engagement, are often held prior to the initiation of research studies to provide information about upcoming study activities and resolve concerns in consultation with potential participants. This study estimated demographic, health, economic, and social network correlates of attendance at community sensitization meetings held in advance of a whole-population, combined behavioral, and biomedical research study in rural Uganda. Methods and findings Research assistants collected survey data from 1,630 adults participating in an ongoing sociocentric social network cohort study conducted in a rural region of southwestern Uganda. These community survey data, collected between 2016 and 2018, were linked to attendance logs from community sensitization meetings held in 2018 and 2019 before the subsequent community survey and community health fair. Of all participants, 264 (16%) attended a community sensitization meeting before the community survey, 464 (28%) attended a meeting before the community health fair, 558 (34%) attended a meeting before either study activity (survey or health fair), and 170 (10%) attended a meeting before both study activities (survey and health fair). Using multivariable Poisson regression models, we estimated correlates of attendance at community sensitization meetings. Attendance was more likely among study participants who were women (adjusted relative risk [ARR]health fair = 1.71, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32 to 2.21, p < 0.001), older age (ARRsurvey = 1.02 per year, 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.02, p < 0.001; ARRhealth fair = 1.02 per year, 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.02, p < 0.001), married (ARRsurvey = 1.74, 95% CI, 1.29 to 2.35, p < 0.001; ARRhealth fair = 1.41, 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.76, p = 0.002), and members of more community groups (ARRsurvey = 1.26 per group, 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.44, p = 0.001; ARRhealth fair = 1.26 per group, 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.43, p < 0.001). Attendance was less likely among study participants who lived farther from meeting locations (ARRsurvey = 0.54 per kilometer, 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.97, p = 0.041; ARRhealth fair = 0.57 per kilometer, 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.86, p = 0.007). Leveraging the cohort’s sociocentric design, social network analyses suggested that information conveyed during community sensitization meetings could reach a broader group of potential study participants through attendees’ social network and household connections. Study limitations include lack of detailed data on reasons for attendance/nonattendance at community sensitization meetings; achieving a representative sample of community members was not an explicit aim of the study; and generalizability may not extend beyond this study setting. Conclusions In this longitudinal, sociocentric social network study conducted in rural Uganda, we observed that older age, female sex, being married, membership in more community groups, and geographical proximity to meeting locations were correlated with attendance at community sensitization meetings held in advance of bio-behavioral research activities. Information conveyed during meetings could have reached a broader portion of the population through attendees’ social network and household connections. To ensure broader input and potentially increase participation in health-related research studies, the dissemination of research-related information through community sensitization meetings may need to target members of underrepresented groups.

show abstract

Spatial Analysis of HIV Infection and Associated Risk Factors in Botswana

Solomon

Furuya‐Kanamori

Wangdi

2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Botswana has the third highest human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevalence globally, and the severity of the epidemic within the country varies considerably between the districts. This study aimed to identify clusters of HIV and associated factors among adults in Botswana. Data from the Botswana Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS) Impact Survey IV (BIAS IV), a nationally representative household-based survey, were used for this study. Multivariable logistic regression and Kulldorf’s scan statistics were used to identify the risk factors and HIV clusters. Socio-demographic characteristics were compared within and outside the clusters. HIV prevalence among the study participants was 25.1% (95% CI 23.3–26.4). HIV infection was significantly higher among the female gender, those older than 24 years and those reporting the use of condoms, while tertiary education had a protective effect. Two significant HIV clusters were identified, one located between Selibe-Phikwe and Francistown and another in the Central Mahalapye district. Clusters had higher levels of unemployment, less people with tertiary education and more people residing in rural areas compared to regions outside the clusters. Our study identified high-risk populations and regions with a high burden of HIV infection in Botswana. This calls for focused innovative and cost-effective HIV interventions on these vulnerable populations and regions to curb the HIV epidemic in Botswana.

show abstract

Formative Work and Community Engagement Approaches for Implementing an HIV Intervention in Botswana Schools

Cited by 3 publications

References 8 publications

Youth engagement in HIV prevention intervention research in sub‐Saharan Africa: a scoping review

Youth engagement in HIV prevention intervention research in sub‐Saharan Africa: a scoping review

Correlates of attendance at community engagement meetings held in advance of bio-behavioral research studies: A longitudinal, sociocentric social network study in rural Uganda

Spatial Analysis of HIV Infection and Associated Risk Factors in Botswana

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About