Ensuring People Living with HIV Inform the Future of HIV Treatment in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review and Recommendations for a Community-Led Research Agenda.

The HIV treatment landscape in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is rapidly evolving, exemplified by the expansion of differentiated service delivery (DSD) during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Long-acting products represent a new frontier that will require a significant redesign of health systems. It is critical to understand service delivery and product preferences of people living with HIV (PLHIV) and ensure evidence generation is guided by community priorities. We conducted a scoping review to identify gaps among preference studies and inform future research. Peer-reviewed articles published from January 2014-May 2022 reporting acceptability or preference data from PLHIV or caregivers for one or more service delivery or product attribute were eligible. Service delivery studies were restricted to LMIC populations while product studies had no geographical restrictions. Based on gaps identified, we consulted advocates to develop community-led research agenda recommendations. Of 6,493 studies identified, 225 studies on service delivery attributes and 47 studies on product preferences were eligible. The most frequently studied delivery models were integration (n = 59) and technology-based interventions (n = 55). Among product literature, only 15 studies included LMIC populations. Consultation with advocates highlighted the need for research on long-acting products, including among pediatric, pregnant, and breastfeeding PLHIV, PLHIV on second-line regimens, and key populations. Consultation also emphasized the need to understand preferences on clinic visit frequency, side effects, and choice. While the preference literature has expanded, gaps remain around long-acting regimens and their delivery. To fill these gaps, the research agenda must be guided by the priorities of communities of PLHIV.

Impacts of multisectoral cash plus programs after four years in an urban informal settlement: Adolescent Girls Initiative-Kenya (AGI-K) randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The vast majority of adolescent births occur in low- and middle-income countries and are associated with negative outcomes for both the mother and her child. A multitude of risk factors may explain why few programs have been successful in delaying childbearing and suggest that multisectoral interventions may be necessary. This study examines the longer-term impact of a two-year (2015-17) multisectoral program on early sexual debut and fertility in an urban informal settlement in Kenya. METHODS: The study used a randomized trial design, longitudinally following 2,075 girls 11-14 years old in 2015 until 2019. The interventions included community dialogues on unequal gender norms and their consequences (violence prevention), a conditional cash transfer (education), health and life skills training (health), and financial literacy training and savings activities (wealth). Girls were randomized to one of four study arms: 1) violence prevention only (V-only); 2) V-only and education (VE); 3) VE and health (VEH); or 4) all four interventions (VEHW). We used ANCOVA to estimate intent-to-treat (ITT) impacts of each study arm and of pooled study arms VE, VEH, and VEHW relative to the V-only arm, on primary outcomes of fertility and herpes simplex virus-2 (HSV-2) infection, and secondary outcomes of education, health knowledge, and wealth creation. Post-hoc analysis was carried out on older girls who were 13-14-years-old at baseline. In 2018, in the VEHW arm, in-depth qualitative evaluation were carried out with adolescent girls, their parents, school staff, mentors, community conversation facilitators, and community gatekeepers. The trial is registered at ISRCTN: ISRCTN77455458. RESULTS: At endline in the V-only study arm, 21.0 percent of girls reported having had sex, 7.7 percent having ever been pregnant and 6.6 percent having ever given birth, with higher rates for the older subsample at 32.5 percent, 11.8 percent, and 10.1 percent, respectively. In the full sample, ever having given birth was reduced by 2.3 percentage points (pp) in the VE and VEHW study arms, significant at 10 percent. For the older subsample there were larger and significant reductions in the percent ever having had sex (8.2 pp), HSV-2 prevalence (7.5 pp) and HSV-2 incidence (5.6 pp) in the VE arm. Two years after the end of the interventions, girls continued to have increased schooling, sexual and reproductive health knowledge, and improved financial savings behaviors. Qualitatively, respondents reported that girls were likely to have sex as a result of child sexual exploitation, peer pressure or influence from the media, as well as for sexual adventure and as a mark of maturity. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that multisectoral cash plus interventions targeting the community and household level, combined with interventions in the education, health, and wealth-creation sectors that directly target individual girls in early adolescence, generate protective factors against early pregnancy during adolescence. Such interventions, therefore, potentially have beneficial impacts on the longer-term health and economic outcomes of girls residing in impoverished settings. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry: ISRCTN77455458; https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN77455458.

COVID-19 and gender-based violence service provision in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Gender-based violence (GBV) policies and services in the United States (U.S.) have historically been underfunded and siloed from other health services. Soon after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, reports emerged noting increases in GBV and disruption of health services but few studies have empirically investigated these impacts. This study examines how the existing GBV funding and policy landscape, COVID-19, and resulting state policies in the first six months of the pandemic affect GBV health service provision in the U.S. METHODS: This is a mixed method study consisting of 1) an analysis of state-by-state emergency response policies review; 2) a quantitative analysis of a survey of U.S.-based GBV service providers (N = 77); and 3) a qualitative analysis of in-depth interviews with U.S.-based GBV service providers (N = 11). Respondents spanned a range of organization types, populations served, and states. RESULTS: Twenty-one states enacted protections for GBV survivors and five states included explicit exemptions from non-essential business closures for GBV service providers. Through the surveys and interviews, GBV service providers note three major themes on COVID-19's impact on GBV services: reductions in GBV service provision and quality and increased workload, shifts in service utilization, and funding impacts. Findings also indicate GBV inequities were exacerbated for historically underserved groups. DISCUSSION: The noted disruptions on GBV services from the COVID-19 pandemic overlaid long-term policy and funding limitations that left service providers unprepared for the challenges posed by the pandemic. Future policies, in emergency and non-emergency contexts, should recognize GBV as essential care and ensure comprehensive services for clients, particularly members of historically underserved groups.