ArticleBMC public health2020
Spillover HIV prevention effects of a cash transfer trial in East Zimbabwe: evidence from a cluster-randomised trial and general-population survey.
Article in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00966849 (The Scientific Evaluation of a Cash Transfer Pilot Project to Support Orphans and Vulnerable Children), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
The Scientific Evaluation of a Cash Transfer Pilot Project to Support Orphans and Vulnerable Children (OVC) in Manicaland, Zimbabwe
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The effects of cash transfer programmes on HIV/AIDS prevention and care outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of intervention studies.The lancet. HIV · 2023Pooled it
- Cash transfers for HIV prevention: A systematic review.PLoS medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Cash transfers targeting adolescent wellbeing: a scoping review of the literature in low- and middle-income countries.Global health action · 2026Article
- Do social protection programmes affect the burden of breast and cervical cancer? A systematic review.Health policy OPEN · 2024Review
- Access to Social Protection by People Living with, at Risk of, or Affected by HIV in Eswatini, Malawi, Tanzania, and Zambia: Results from Population-Based HIV Impact Assessments.AIDS and behavior · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBenefits of cash transfers (CTs) for HIV prevention have been demonstrated largely in purposively designed trials, commonly focusing on young women. It is less clear if CT interventions not designed for HIV prevention can have HIV-specific effects, including adverse effects. The cluster-randomised Manicaland Cash Transfer Trial (2010-11) evaluated effects of CTs on children's (2-17 years) development in eastern Zimbabwe. We evaluated whether this CT intervention with no HIV-specific objectives had unintended HIV prevention spillover effects (externalities).
methodsData on 2909 individuals (15-54 years) living in trial households were taken from a general-population survey, conducted simultaneously in the same communities as the Manicaland Trial. Average treatment effects (ATEs) of CTs on sexual behaviour (any recent sex, condom use, multiple partners) and secondary outcomes (mental distress, school enrolment, and alcohol/cigarette/drug consumption) were estimated using mixed-effects logistic regressions (random effects for study site and intervention cluster), by sex and age group (15-29; 30-54 years). Outcomes were also evaluated with a larger synthetic comparison group created through propensity score matching.
resultsCTs did not affect sexual debut but reduced having any recent sex (past 30 days) among young males (ATE: - 11.7 percentage points [PP] [95% confidence interval: -26.0PP, 2.61PP]) and females (- 5.68PP [- 15.7PP, 4.34PP]), with similar but less uncertain estimates when compared against the synthetic comparison group (males: -9.68PP [- 13.1PP, - 6.30PP]; females: -8.77PP [- 16.3PP, - 1.23PP]). There were no effects among older individuals. Young (but not older) males receiving CTs reported increased multiple partnerships (8.49PP [- 5.40PP, 22.4PP]; synthetic comparison: 10.3PP (1.27PP, 19.2PP). No impact on alcohol, cigarette, or drug consumption was found. There are indications that CTs reduced psychological distress among young people, although impacts were small. CTs increased school enrolment in males (11.5PP [3.05PP, 19.9PP]). Analyses with the synthetic comparison group (but not the original control group) further indicated increased school enrolment among females (5.50PP [1.62PP, 9.37PP]) and condom use among younger and older women receiving CTs (9.38PP [5.90PP, 12.9PP]; 5.95PP [1.46PP, 10.4PP]).
conclusionsNon-HIV-prevention CT interventions can have HIV prevention outcomes, including reduced sexual activity among young people and increased multiple partnerships among young men. No effects on sexual debut or alcohol, cigarette, or drug consumption were observed. A broad approach is necessary to evaluate CT interventions to capture unintended outcomes, particularly in economic evaluations.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov , NCT00966849 . Registered August 27, 2009.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.