Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25886371›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2015

Sexual health risk reduction interventions for people with severe mental illness: a systematic review.

Abdullah Pandor, Eva Kaltenthaler, Agnes Higgins, Karen Lorimer, Shubulade Smith, Kevan Wylie, Ruth Wong

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Abdullah PandorHealth Economics and Decision Science, ScHARR, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. a.pandor@sheffield.ac.uk.
Eva KaltenthalerHealth Economics and Decision Science, ScHARR, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. e.kaltenthaler@sheffield.ac.uk.
Agnes HigginsSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. ahiggins@tcd.ie.
Karen LorimerSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK. Karen.Lorimer@gcu.ac.uk.
Shubulade SmithInstitute of Psychiatry at Kings College London, London, UK. shubulade.smith@kcl.ac.uk.
Kevan WyliePorterbrook Clinic, Sheffield, UK. k.r.wylie@sheffield.ac.uk.
Ruth WongHealth Economics and Decision Science, ScHARR, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. ruth.wong@sheffield.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite variability in sexual activity among people with severe mental illness, high-risk sexual behavior (e.g. unprotected intercourse, multiple partners, sex trade and illicit drug use) is common. Sexual health risk reduction interventions (such as educational and behavioral interventions, motivational exercises, counselling and service delivery), developed and implemented for people with severe mental illness, may improve participants' knowledge, attitudes, beliefs behaviors or practices (including assertiveness skills) and could lead to a reduction in risky sexual behavior. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of sexual health risk reduction interventions for people with severe mental illness.

methodsThirteen electronic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO) were searched to August 2014, and supplemented by hand-searching relevant articles and contacting experts. All controlled trials (randomized or non-randomized) comparing the effectiveness of sexual health risk reduction interventions with usual care for individuals living in the community with severe mental illness were included. Outcomes included a range of biological, behavioral and proxy endpoints. Narrative synthesis was used to combine the evidence.

resultsThirteen controlled trials (all from the USA) were included. Although there was no clear and consistent evidence that interventions reduce the total number of sex partners or improved behavioral intentions in sexual risk behavior, positive effects were generally observed in condom use, condom protected intercourse and on measures of HIV knowledge, attitudes to condom use and sexual behaviors and practices. However, the robustness of these findings is low due to the large between study variability, small sample sizes and low-to-moderate quality of included studies.

conclusionsThere is insufficient evidence at present to fully support or reject the identified sexual health risk reduction interventions for people with severe mental illness. Given the serious consequences of high-risk sexual behaviors, there is an urgent need for well-designed UK based trials, as well as training and support for staff implementing sexual health risk reduction interventions.

trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42013003674 .

Indexed as

Behavior TherapyMental DisordersReproductive HealthRisk Reduction BehaviorSexual BehaviorFemaleHumansMaleRisk-TakingSeverity of Illness IndexUnsafe Sex

Identifiers

PMID25886371
PMCPMC4330652

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.