Ability of HIV Advocacy to Modify Behavioral Norms and Treatment Impact: A Systematic Review.

• Autores: Bruno F. Sunguya, Murallitharan Munisamy, Sathirakorn Pongpanich, Junko Yasuoka, Masamine Jimba
• Localización: American journal of public health, ISSN 0090-0036, Vol. 106, Nº. 8, 2016, págs. 1-8
• Idioma: inglés
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Resumen

  • Background. HIV advocacy programs are partly responsible for the global community's success in reducing the burden of HIV. The rising wave of the globalburdenofnoncommunicablediseases (NCDs)has promptedtheWorld Health Organization to espouse NCD advocacy efforts as a possible preventive strategy. HIV and NCDs share some similarities in their chronicity and risky behaviors, which are their associated etiology. Therefore, pooled evidence on the effectiveness ofHIV advocacy programs and ideas shared could be replicated and applied during the conceptualization of NCD advocacy programs. Such evidence, however, has not been systematically reviewed to address the effectiveness of HIV advocacy programs, particularly programs that aimed at changing public behaviors deemed as risk factors. Objectives. To determine the effectiveness of HIV advocacy programs and draw lessons from those that are effective to strengthen future noncommunicable disease advocacy programs. Search methods. We searched for evidence regarding the effectiveness of HIV advocacy programs in medical databases: PubMed, The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Plus, Educational Resources and Information Center, andWeb of Science, with articles dated from 1994 to 2014. Search criteria. The review protocol was registered before this review. The inclusion criteria were studies on advocacy programs or interventions. We selected studies with the following designs: randomized controlled design studies, pre-post intervention studies, cohorts and other longitudinal studies, quasi-experimental design studies, and cross-sectional studies that reported changes in outcome variables of interest following advocacy programs. We constructed Boolean search terms and used them in PubMed as well as other databases, in line with a population, intervention, comparator, and outcome question. The flow of evidence search and reporting followed the standard Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Data collection and analysis. We selected 2 outcome variables (i.e., changing social norms and a change in impact) out of 6 key outcomes of advocacy interventions. We assessed the riskof bias for all selected studies by using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized studies and using the Risk of Bias for Nonrandomized Observational Studies for observational studies. We did not grade the collective quality of evidence because of differences between the studies, with regard to methods, study designs, and context. Moreover, we could not carry out meta-analyses because of heterogeneity and the diverse study designs; thus, we used a narrative synthesis to report the findings. Main results. Atotal of25studieswereeligible, ofthe1463studies retrieved from selected databases. Twenty-two of the studies indicated a shift in social norms as a result of HIV advocacyprograms, and3indicateda changein impact. We drew 6 lessons from these programs that may be useful for noncommunicable disease advocacy: (1) involving at-risk populations in advocacy programs, (2) working with laypersons and community members, (3) working with peer advocates and activists, (4) targeting specific age groups and asking support from celebrities, (5) targeting several, but specific, risk factors, and (6) using an evidence-based approach through formative research. Author conclusions. HIV advocacy programs have been effective in shifting social norms and facilitating a change in impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]