Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26608175›Full record

SynthesisAIDS care2015

Are couple-based interventions more effective than interventions delivered to individuals in promoting HIV protective behaviors? A meta-analysis.

Nicole Crepaz, Malu V Tungol-Ashmon, H Waverly Vosburgh, Brittney N Baack, Mary M Mullins

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in AIDS care, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03809364 (Supporting Treatment for Anti-Retroviral Therapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 60 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 6 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.

NCT03809364 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Supporting Treatment for Anti-Retroviral Therapy (START) Together: Development of a Couple-based Medication Adherence Intervention for HIV-positive Women and Their Male Partners in Sweetwaters, South Africa

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Maryland, College ParkRan2021 to 2022Enrolled40ConditionsHuman Immunodeficiency VirusArmsSTART Together
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

60 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review: Infidelity, Romantic Jealousy and Intimate Partner Violence against Women.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Results of a Couples-Based Randomized Controlled Trial Aimed to Increase Testing for HIV.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2019
    Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Compendium of dyadic behavior change techniques v2.0: results from a Delphi study.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2025
    Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Nicole Crepaza Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention , The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta , GA , USA.
Malu V Tungol-Ashmona Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention , The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta , GA , USA.
H Waverly Vosburgha Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention , The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta , GA , USA.
Brittney N Baacka Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention , The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta , GA , USA.
Mary M Mullinsa Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention , The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta , GA , USA.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite several advantages to bringing couples together to learn how to protect themselves and new-born children from the risk of HIV infection, most interventions are designed for individuals or groups, not for dyads. This meta-analysis provides a direct test of whether couple-based interventions are more effective in promoting HIV protective behaviors than interventions delivered to individuals. We conducted systematic searches of five electronic databases and 60 journals. Eligible studies were controlled trials or prospective cohort designs; evaluated a couple-based intervention compared to an individual-level intervention; assessed at least one HIV prevention outcome (e.g., protective sex, drug use, HIV testing, medication adherence, and sexually transmitted infections [STI]); and were published between 1988 and 2014. Fifteen interventions, including 21,882 participants from China, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, Trinidad, Zambia, and the USA, were evaluated. The results of random-effects models showed statistically significant intervention effects for protective sex (OR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.21, 2.11), HIV testing (OR = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.31, 2.45), and Nevirapine uptake (OR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.02, 2.24). The evidence demonstrates the usefulness of couple-based interventions in protecting individuals, partners, and new-born children from the risk of HIV transmission and infection.

Indexed as

Family CharacteristicsSafe SexSex CounselingFemaleHeterosexualityHIV InfectionsHomosexuality, MaleHumansMaleSexually Transmitted DiseasesSexual Partnerscouple-basedHIV preventioninterventionmeta-analysissystematic review

Identifiers

PMID26608175
PMCPMC4693597

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.