Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27404006›Full record

ArticleJournal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999)2016

Feasibility and Effectiveness of a Peer Referral Incentive Intervention to Promote Male Circumcision Uptake in Zambia.

Arianna Zanolini, Carolyn Bolton, Lane-Lee Lyabola, Gabriel Phiri, Alick Samona, Albert Kaonga, Harsha Thirumurthy

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Arianna Zanolini*Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia; †Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; ‡Society for Family Health, Lusaka, Zambia; and §Ministry of Community Development, Mother and Child Health, Lusaka, Zambia.
Carolyn Bolton
Lane-Lee Lyabola
Gabriel Phiri
Alick Samona
Albert Kaonga
Harsha Thirumurthy
Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia · ZMUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USMinistry of Community Development, Mother and Child Health · ZM

Funding

Research Services CoreP2CHD050924 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI KAREN B GUZZO · 2015 to 2026
$9.6M
Fogarty Global Health Fellows Coordinating CenterR25TW009340 · FIC · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI CHI, BENJAMIN H. · 2012 to 2016
$6.9M
FIC NIH HHS R25 TW009340NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD050924
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedical male circumcision is a promising HIV prevention tool in countries with generalized HIV epidemics, but demand creation interventions are needed to support scale-up. We piloted a peer referral intervention in which circumcision clients were offered incentives for referring their peers for circumcision.

methodsThe intervention was implemented between June 2014 and February 2015 in 6 randomly selected health facilities in Southern Province, Zambia. For the first 5 months, circumcision clients ≥18 years of age were given referral vouchers that allowed them to refer up to 5 peers for circumcision within a 3-month period. An incentive of US$2 was offered for each referral. The primary outcome was the number of circumcisions performed per month in each facility. To assess the effect of the intervention, a difference-in-difference analysis was performed using longitudinal data from the intervention facilities and 22 nonintervention facilities. A questionnaire was also implemented to understand men's perceptions of the intervention.

resultsDuring the 8-month intervention period, 1222 men over 18 years of age were circumcised in intervention facilities. In the first 5 months, 699 circumcision clients were enrolled and 385 clients brought a referral voucher given to them by an enrolled client. Difference-in-difference analyses did not show a significant increase in circumcisions performed in intervention facilities. However, circumcision clients reported that the referral incentive motivated them to encourage their friends to seek male circumcision. Peer referrals were also reported to be an important factor in men's decisions because 78% of clients who were referred reported that talking with a circumcised friend was important for their decision to get circumcised.

conclusionsThe peer referral incentive intervention for male circumcision was feasible and acceptable. However, the intervention did not have a significant effect on demand for male circumcision. Barriers to circumcision and features of the intervention may have limited the effect of the intervention. Further efforts regarding encouraging male-to-male communication and evaluations with larger sample sizes are needed.

Indexed as

Peer GroupReferral and ConsultationAdolescentAdultCircumcision, MaleFeasibility StudiesHumansMalePilot ProjectsProgram EvaluationYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID27404006
PMCPMC5054967
OpenAlexW2472598036

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.