Trial Outcomes & Findings for Interrupting HIV and TB Stigma in the Household in Uganda (NCT NCT05124665)
NCT ID: NCT05124665
Last Updated: 2024-02-14
Results Overview
To test the hypothesis that a norming intervention can increase test uptake, the investigators will compare testing uptake among the intervention households and control households using cluster-adjusted chi-squared tests of proportion and by fitting mixed effects logistic regression models with two levels (household, contact). The effect of the intervention will then be evaluated by comparing adjusted slope differences in the primary outcomes (test uptake) between the intervention and the control arms, using random intercept mixed logit models to account for clustering by household.
Recruitment status
COMPLETED
Study phase
NA
Target enrollment
612 participants
Primary outcome timeframe
up to 8 weeks
Results posted on
2024-02-14
Participant Flow
208 index participants were randomized to be contacted for either Social Support or Standard of Care were identified and randomized to be approached in the community. Presented are the totals that agreed to participate in terms of the number of index participants that consented to participants and then added household contacts that consented to also participate.
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Social Support
CHWs will offer HIV testing to the individual nominated by the index patient as most likely to test. If this person is not present, CHWs will decide which contact should be offered testing first. CHWs will use a prosocial script for HIV testing: "Knowing your status sets a good example for your household." CHWs will follow an "opt-out" strategy: "This test kit is approved by the Ministry of Health and used in KCCA health facilities. I am going to offer you a free HIV test now, is that okay?". If the initial household contact who is offered HIV testing agrees to test, the CHW will ask if he/she is willing to share his/her decision to test with other members of the household: "Would you like to share your decision to test with the others? Sharing is completely optional. However, learning that someone else in their household decided to test sometimes gives people the strength to test themselves. Sharing your decision might help another person find the strength to test."
Social Support: The intervention to be evaluated in this study is a multidimensional, socio-behavioral "Norming" intervention. The various components of this intervention are designed to harness household dynamics and prosocial inclinations to encourage individuals to accept the HIV testing invitation. Each component is briefly described in the arm description.
|
Standard of Care
As a control for the socio-behavioral intervention, the control arm will lack the socio-behavioral intervention components. The order of testing invitation will be decided by the CHW; and CHWs will be trained at baseline to provide standard, opt-in framing of test offers, without any mention of asking contacts to share their testing decision with other household contacts. Oral HIV kits will also be used in control households.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
STARTED
|
364
|
248
|
|
Overall Study
Index Patients
|
79
|
61
|
|
Overall Study
Household Contacts
|
285
|
187
|
|
Overall Study
COMPLETED
|
364
|
248
|
|
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
|
0
|
0
|
Reasons for withdrawal
Withdrawal data not reported
Baseline Characteristics
Race and Ethnicity were not collected from any participant.
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Social Support: Household Contacts
n=285 Participants
CHWs will offer HIV testing to the individual nominated by the index patient as most likely to test. If this person is not present, CHWs will decide which contact should be offered testing first. CHWs will use a prosocial script for HIV testing: "Knowing your status sets a good example for your household." CHWs will follow an "opt-out" strategy: "This test kit is approved by the Ministry of Health and used in KCCA health facilities. I am going to offer you a free HIV test now, is that okay?". If the initial household contact who is offered HIV testing agrees to test, the CHW will ask if he/she is willing to share his/her decision to test with other members of the household: "Would you like to share your decision to test with the others? Sharing is completely optional. However, learning that someone else in their household decided to test sometimes gives people the strength to test themselves. Sharing your decision might help another person find the strength to test."
Social Support: The intervention to be evaluated in this study is a multidimensional, socio-behavioral "Norming" intervention. The various components of this intervention are designed to harness household dynamics and prosocial inclinations to encourage individuals to accept the HIV testing invitation. Each component is briefly described in the arm description.
|
Social Support: Index Participants
n=79 Participants
Social Support: The intervention to be evaluated in this study is a multidimensional, socio-behavioral "Norming" intervention. The various components of this intervention are designed to harness household dynamics and prosocial inclinations to encourage individuals to accept the HIV testing invitation. Each component is briefly described in the arm description.
|
Standard of Care: Household Contacts
n=187 Participants
As a control for the socio-behavioral intervention, the control arm will lack the socio-behavioral intervention components. The order of testing invitation will be decided by the CHW; and CHWs will be trained at baseline to provide standard, opt-in framing of test offers, without any mention of asking contacts to share their testing decision with other household contacts. Oral HIV kits will also be used in control households.
|
Standard of Care: Index Participants
n=61 Participants
As a control for the socio-behavioral intervention, the control arm will lack the socio-behavioral intervention components. The order of testing invitation will be decided by the CHW; and CHWs will be trained at baseline to provide standard, opt-in framing of test offers, without any mention of asking contacts to share their testing decision with other household contacts. Oral HIV kits will also be used in control households.
|
Total
n=612 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Continuous
|
29.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.7 • n=285 Participants
|
31.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 16.9 • n=79 Participants
|
31.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 14.4 • n=187 Participants
|
28.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 18.5 • n=61 Participants
|
30.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.4 • n=612 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
187 Participants
n=285 Participants
|
35 Participants
n=79 Participants
|
122 Participants
n=187 Participants
|
22 Participants
n=61 Participants
|
366 Participants
n=612 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
98 Participants
n=285 Participants
|
44 Participants
n=79 Participants
|
65 Participants
n=187 Participants
|
39 Participants
n=61 Participants
|
246 Participants
n=612 Participants
|
|
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
0 Participants
Race and Ethnicity were not collected from any participant.
|
|
Region of Enrollment
Uganda
|
285 participants
n=285 Participants • Count of Index Participants
|
79 participants
n=79 Participants • Count of Index Participants
|
187 participants
n=187 Participants • Count of Index Participants
|
61 participants
n=61 Participants • Count of Index Participants
|
612 participants
n=612 Participants • Count of Index Participants
|
|
HIV Status
Not Known to be Living with HIV
|
224 Participants
n=285 Participants
|
50 Participants
n=79 Participants
|
152 Participants
n=187 Participants
|
49 Participants
n=61 Participants
|
475 Participants
n=612 Participants
|
|
HIV Status
Unknown/Never Tested
|
61 Participants
n=285 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=79 Participants
|
35 Participants
n=187 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=61 Participants
|
96 Participants
n=612 Participants
|
|
HIV Status
Person Living with HIV
|
0 Participants
n=285 Participants
|
29 Participants
n=79 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=187 Participants
|
12 Participants
n=61 Participants
|
41 Participants
n=612 Participants
|
|
Education Level
No Formal Education
|
13 Participants
n=285 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
7 Participants
n=187 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
20 Participants
n=472 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
|
Education Level
Level 1-4
|
22 Participants
n=285 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
15 Participants
n=187 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
37 Participants
n=472 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
|
Education Level
Level 5-7
|
66 Participants
n=285 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
50 Participants
n=187 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
116 Participants
n=472 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
|
Education Level
O-Level
|
104 Participants
n=285 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
66 Participants
n=187 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
170 Participants
n=472 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
|
Education Level
A-Level
|
38 Participants
n=285 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
18 Participants
n=187 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
56 Participants
n=472 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
|
Education Level
Vocational
|
5 Participants
n=285 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
5 Participants
n=187 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
10 Participants
n=472 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
|
Education Level
Tertiary/University
|
31 Participants
n=285 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
24 Participants
n=187 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
55 Participants
n=472 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
|
Education Level
Post-Graduate
|
6 Participants
n=285 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
2 Participants
n=187 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
—
|
8 Participants
n=472 Participants • Education data collected only for Household Contacts
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: up to 8 weeksPopulation: Household Contacts
To test the hypothesis that a norming intervention can increase test uptake, the investigators will compare testing uptake among the intervention households and control households using cluster-adjusted chi-squared tests of proportion and by fitting mixed effects logistic regression models with two levels (household, contact). The effect of the intervention will then be evaluated by comparing adjusted slope differences in the primary outcomes (test uptake) between the intervention and the control arms, using random intercept mixed logit models to account for clustering by household.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Social Support: Household Contacts
n=285 Participants
CHWs will offer HIV testing to the individual nominated by the index patient as most likely to test. If this person is not present, CHWs will decide which contact should be offered testing first. CHWs will use a prosocial script for HIV testing: "Knowing your status sets a good example for your household." CHWs will follow an "opt-out" strategy: "This test kit is approved by the Ministry of Health and used in KCCA health facilities. I am going to offer you a free HIV test now, is that okay?". If the initial household contact who is offered HIV testing agrees to test, the CHW will ask if he/she is willing to share his/her decision to test with other members of the household: "Would you like to share your decision to test with the others? Sharing is completely optional. However, learning that someone else in their household decided to test sometimes gives people the strength to test themselves. Sharing your decision might help another person find the strength to test."
Social Support: The intervention to be evaluated in this study is a multidimensional, socio-behavioral "Norming" intervention. The various components of this intervention are designed to harness household dynamics and prosocial inclinations to encourage individuals to accept the HIV testing invitation. Each component is briefly described in the arm description.
|
Standard of Care: Household Contacts
n=187 Participants
As a control for the socio-behavioral intervention, the control arm will lack the socio-behavioral intervention components. The order of testing invitation will be decided by the CHW; and CHWs will be trained at baseline to provide standard, opt-in framing of test offers, without any mention of asking contacts to share their testing decision with other household contacts. Oral HIV kits will also be used in control households.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Proportion of Contacts Accepting HIV Testing
|
279 Participants
|
172 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline to End of Interview (Up to 8 hours)Population: Household Contacts
Change in HIV Stigma will be evaluated by measuring the change in HIV-TB stigma as measured by the Van Rie paired HIV-TB Stigma Scales (adapted for use in Uganda) using multilevel models. The investigators will use mixed effects Poisson regression models to evaluate changes in HIV stigma measured after the household visit among a two-stage,stratified random sample of participants. Van Rie Perceived TB and HIV Stigma scales adapted and validated in the Ugandan context are used. Scores range from 0 to 100 (standardized scale). Higher values represent higher levels of perceived stigma. The timeframe has been updated to reflect changes in follow up due to COVID-19 restrictions.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Social Support: Household Contacts
n=285 Participants
CHWs will offer HIV testing to the individual nominated by the index patient as most likely to test. If this person is not present, CHWs will decide which contact should be offered testing first. CHWs will use a prosocial script for HIV testing: "Knowing your status sets a good example for your household." CHWs will follow an "opt-out" strategy: "This test kit is approved by the Ministry of Health and used in KCCA health facilities. I am going to offer you a free HIV test now, is that okay?". If the initial household contact who is offered HIV testing agrees to test, the CHW will ask if he/she is willing to share his/her decision to test with other members of the household: "Would you like to share your decision to test with the others? Sharing is completely optional. However, learning that someone else in their household decided to test sometimes gives people the strength to test themselves. Sharing your decision might help another person find the strength to test."
Social Support: The intervention to be evaluated in this study is a multidimensional, socio-behavioral "Norming" intervention. The various components of this intervention are designed to harness household dynamics and prosocial inclinations to encourage individuals to accept the HIV testing invitation. Each component is briefly described in the arm description.
|
Standard of Care: Household Contacts
n=187 Participants
As a control for the socio-behavioral intervention, the control arm will lack the socio-behavioral intervention components. The order of testing invitation will be decided by the CHW; and CHWs will be trained at baseline to provide standard, opt-in framing of test offers, without any mention of asking contacts to share their testing decision with other household contacts. Oral HIV kits will also be used in control households.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Score of Perceived HIV Stigma
|
2.57 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.9
|
-0.21 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 18.6
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline to End of Interview (Up to 8 hours)Population: Household Contacts
Change in TB Stigma will be evaluated by measuring the change in perceived TB stigma as measured by the Van Rie paired HIV-TB Stigma Scales (adapted for use in Uganda) using multilevel models. The investigators will use mixed effects Poisson regression models to evaluate changes in TB stigma measured after the household visit among a two-stage,stratified random sample of participants. Van Rie Perceived TB and HIV Stigma scales adapted and validated in the Ugandan context are used. Scores range from 0 to 100 (standardized scale). Higher values represent higher levels of perceived stigma. The timeframe has been updated to reflect changes in follow up due to COVID-19 restrictions.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Social Support: Household Contacts
n=285 Participants
CHWs will offer HIV testing to the individual nominated by the index patient as most likely to test. If this person is not present, CHWs will decide which contact should be offered testing first. CHWs will use a prosocial script for HIV testing: "Knowing your status sets a good example for your household." CHWs will follow an "opt-out" strategy: "This test kit is approved by the Ministry of Health and used in KCCA health facilities. I am going to offer you a free HIV test now, is that okay?". If the initial household contact who is offered HIV testing agrees to test, the CHW will ask if he/she is willing to share his/her decision to test with other members of the household: "Would you like to share your decision to test with the others? Sharing is completely optional. However, learning that someone else in their household decided to test sometimes gives people the strength to test themselves. Sharing your decision might help another person find the strength to test."
Social Support: The intervention to be evaluated in this study is a multidimensional, socio-behavioral "Norming" intervention. The various components of this intervention are designed to harness household dynamics and prosocial inclinations to encourage individuals to accept the HIV testing invitation. Each component is briefly described in the arm description.
|
Standard of Care: Household Contacts
n=187 Participants
As a control for the socio-behavioral intervention, the control arm will lack the socio-behavioral intervention components. The order of testing invitation will be decided by the CHW; and CHWs will be trained at baseline to provide standard, opt-in framing of test offers, without any mention of asking contacts to share their testing decision with other household contacts. Oral HIV kits will also be used in control households.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Score of Perceived TB Stigma
|
0.47 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 20.8
|
-2.52 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 17.8
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline to Immediately post intervention (up to 8 hours)Population: Household Contacts
The investigators will conduct a causal mediation analysis to determine the degree to which the effects of the intervention on HIV stigma explain the improvement in HIV test uptake using observed-variable structural equation modeling. HIV stigma will be measured using the Van Rie paired HIV-TB Stigma Scales (adapted for use in Uganda) and standardized scores (0 to 100) will be utilized. Higher score represents higher levels of perceived stigma.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Social Support: Household Contacts
n=285 Participants
CHWs will offer HIV testing to the individual nominated by the index patient as most likely to test. If this person is not present, CHWs will decide which contact should be offered testing first. CHWs will use a prosocial script for HIV testing: "Knowing your status sets a good example for your household." CHWs will follow an "opt-out" strategy: "This test kit is approved by the Ministry of Health and used in KCCA health facilities. I am going to offer you a free HIV test now, is that okay?". If the initial household contact who is offered HIV testing agrees to test, the CHW will ask if he/she is willing to share his/her decision to test with other members of the household: "Would you like to share your decision to test with the others? Sharing is completely optional. However, learning that someone else in their household decided to test sometimes gives people the strength to test themselves. Sharing your decision might help another person find the strength to test."
Social Support: The intervention to be evaluated in this study is a multidimensional, socio-behavioral "Norming" intervention. The various components of this intervention are designed to harness household dynamics and prosocial inclinations to encourage individuals to accept the HIV testing invitation. Each component is briefly described in the arm description.
|
Standard of Care: Household Contacts
n=187 Participants
As a control for the socio-behavioral intervention, the control arm will lack the socio-behavioral intervention components. The order of testing invitation will be decided by the CHW; and CHWs will be trained at baseline to provide standard, opt-in framing of test offers, without any mention of asking contacts to share their testing decision with other household contacts. Oral HIV kits will also be used in control households.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Effects of Perceived HIV Stigma on HIV Test Uptake
|
2.59 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.75
|
-0.17 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 20.09
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline to End of Interview (Up to 8 hours)Population: Household Contacts
The investigators will conduct a causal mediation analysis to determine the degree to which the effects of the intervention on TB stigma explain the improvement in HIV test uptake using observed-variable structural equation modeling. TB stigma will be measured using the Van Rie paired HIV-TB Stigma Scales (adapted for use in Uganda) and standardized scores (0 to 100) will be utilized. Higher score represents higher levels of perceived stigma.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Social Support: Household Contacts
n=285 Participants
CHWs will offer HIV testing to the individual nominated by the index patient as most likely to test. If this person is not present, CHWs will decide which contact should be offered testing first. CHWs will use a prosocial script for HIV testing: "Knowing your status sets a good example for your household." CHWs will follow an "opt-out" strategy: "This test kit is approved by the Ministry of Health and used in KCCA health facilities. I am going to offer you a free HIV test now, is that okay?". If the initial household contact who is offered HIV testing agrees to test, the CHW will ask if he/she is willing to share his/her decision to test with other members of the household: "Would you like to share your decision to test with the others? Sharing is completely optional. However, learning that someone else in their household decided to test sometimes gives people the strength to test themselves. Sharing your decision might help another person find the strength to test."
Social Support: The intervention to be evaluated in this study is a multidimensional, socio-behavioral "Norming" intervention. The various components of this intervention are designed to harness household dynamics and prosocial inclinations to encourage individuals to accept the HIV testing invitation. Each component is briefly described in the arm description.
|
Standard of Care: Household Contacts
n=187 Participants
As a control for the socio-behavioral intervention, the control arm will lack the socio-behavioral intervention components. The order of testing invitation will be decided by the CHW; and CHWs will be trained at baseline to provide standard, opt-in framing of test offers, without any mention of asking contacts to share their testing decision with other household contacts. Oral HIV kits will also be used in control households.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Effects of Perceived TB Stigma on HIV Test Uptake
|
-0.46 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.12
|
-2.34 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.82
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: up to 8 weeksPopulation: Household Contacts
The investigators will measure the proportion of testing preference predictions made by the index patient about their household contacts that were accurate, that is, the proportion of household members who accepted the HIV test among those nominated by the index patient as being most likely to accept the HIV test. The proportion of first testers who accepted the HIV test in the intervention arm will be compared to the proportion of first testers who took the HIV test in the control arm.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Social Support: Household Contacts
n=59 Participants
CHWs will offer HIV testing to the individual nominated by the index patient as most likely to test. If this person is not present, CHWs will decide which contact should be offered testing first. CHWs will use a prosocial script for HIV testing: "Knowing your status sets a good example for your household." CHWs will follow an "opt-out" strategy: "This test kit is approved by the Ministry of Health and used in KCCA health facilities. I am going to offer you a free HIV test now, is that okay?". If the initial household contact who is offered HIV testing agrees to test, the CHW will ask if he/she is willing to share his/her decision to test with other members of the household: "Would you like to share your decision to test with the others? Sharing is completely optional. However, learning that someone else in their household decided to test sometimes gives people the strength to test themselves. Sharing your decision might help another person find the strength to test."
Social Support: The intervention to be evaluated in this study is a multidimensional, socio-behavioral "Norming" intervention. The various components of this intervention are designed to harness household dynamics and prosocial inclinations to encourage individuals to accept the HIV testing invitation. Each component is briefly described in the arm description.
|
Standard of Care: Household Contacts
n=33 Participants
As a control for the socio-behavioral intervention, the control arm will lack the socio-behavioral intervention components. The order of testing invitation will be decided by the CHW; and CHWs will be trained at baseline to provide standard, opt-in framing of test offers, without any mention of asking contacts to share their testing decision with other household contacts. Oral HIV kits will also be used in control households.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Proportion of Index Patient Nominated Household Members Who Accept HIV Test
|
58 Participants
|
33 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: up to 8 weeksPopulation: Household Contacts
The investigators will estimate in the intervention arm the effect of first testers' decision to disclose on subsequent testers' decisions to test in the intervention arm using a logistic regression model. This will be assessed with relative risk of first testers' decision to disclose testing decision on subsequent household members decision to test for HIV.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Social Support: Household Contacts
n=285 Participants
CHWs will offer HIV testing to the individual nominated by the index patient as most likely to test. If this person is not present, CHWs will decide which contact should be offered testing first. CHWs will use a prosocial script for HIV testing: "Knowing your status sets a good example for your household." CHWs will follow an "opt-out" strategy: "This test kit is approved by the Ministry of Health and used in KCCA health facilities. I am going to offer you a free HIV test now, is that okay?". If the initial household contact who is offered HIV testing agrees to test, the CHW will ask if he/she is willing to share his/her decision to test with other members of the household: "Would you like to share your decision to test with the others? Sharing is completely optional. However, learning that someone else in their household decided to test sometimes gives people the strength to test themselves. Sharing your decision might help another person find the strength to test."
Social Support: The intervention to be evaluated in this study is a multidimensional, socio-behavioral "Norming" intervention. The various components of this intervention are designed to harness household dynamics and prosocial inclinations to encourage individuals to accept the HIV testing invitation. Each component is briefly described in the arm description.
|
Standard of Care: Household Contacts
As a control for the socio-behavioral intervention, the control arm will lack the socio-behavioral intervention components. The order of testing invitation will be decided by the CHW; and CHWs will be trained at baseline to provide standard, opt-in framing of test offers, without any mention of asking contacts to share their testing decision with other household contacts. Oral HIV kits will also be used in control households.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Social Support Household Contacts Deciding to Test for HIV
|
196 Participants
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: up to 8 weeksPopulation: Only includes contacts who provided a nomination for social influence within the household (subset of all household contacts)
The investigators will assess the concordance of index patients' perceptions of their household contacts' influence on health decisions within the household with the perceptions of the rest of their household. To do so, the investigators will measure the number of participants that provide social influence nominations that align with nominations by the household contacts in the intervention arm.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Social Support: Household Contacts
n=246 Participants
CHWs will offer HIV testing to the individual nominated by the index patient as most likely to test. If this person is not present, CHWs will decide which contact should be offered testing first. CHWs will use a prosocial script for HIV testing: "Knowing your status sets a good example for your household." CHWs will follow an "opt-out" strategy: "This test kit is approved by the Ministry of Health and used in KCCA health facilities. I am going to offer you a free HIV test now, is that okay?". If the initial household contact who is offered HIV testing agrees to test, the CHW will ask if he/she is willing to share his/her decision to test with other members of the household: "Would you like to share your decision to test with the others? Sharing is completely optional. However, learning that someone else in their household decided to test sometimes gives people the strength to test themselves. Sharing your decision might help another person find the strength to test."
Social Support: The intervention to be evaluated in this study is a multidimensional, socio-behavioral "Norming" intervention. The various components of this intervention are designed to harness household dynamics and prosocial inclinations to encourage individuals to accept the HIV testing invitation. Each component is briefly described in the arm description.
|
Standard of Care: Household Contacts
n=152 Participants
As a control for the socio-behavioral intervention, the control arm will lack the socio-behavioral intervention components. The order of testing invitation will be decided by the CHW; and CHWs will be trained at baseline to provide standard, opt-in framing of test offers, without any mention of asking contacts to share their testing decision with other household contacts. Oral HIV kits will also be used in control households.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Count of Social Influence Nominations (Participants) by the Index Patient That Align With Nominations by the Household Contacts
|
148 Participants
|
59 Participants
|
Adverse Events
Social Support: Index Participants
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Social Support: Household Contacts
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Standard of Care: Index Participants
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Standard of Care: Household Contacts
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Serious adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Other adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Additional Information
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
- Publication restrictions are in place