, a bio/informatics shared resource is still "open for business" - Visit the CDS website


Efficacy of peer-led interventions to reduce unprotected anal intercourse among men who have sex with men: a meta-analysis.

Ye S, Yin L, Amico R, Simoni J, Vermund S, Ruan Y, Shao Y, Qian HZ
PLoS One. 2014 9 (3): e90788

PMID: 24614809 · PMCID: PMC3948720 · DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0090788

OBJECTIVE - To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of peer-led interventions in reducing unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) among men who have sex with men (MSM).

METHODS - Randomized clinical trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental studies, pre- and post-intervention studies without control groups, and serial cross-sectional assessments involving peers delivering interventions among MSM and published as of February 2012 were identified by systematically searching 13 electronic databases and cross-referencing. Effect sizes (ES) were calculated as the changes of standardized mean difference (SMD) in UAI between groups or pre-post intervention.

RESULTS - A total of 22 studies met the eligibility criteria, including five RCTs, six quasi-experimental studies, six pre-and-post intervention studies, and five serial cross-sectional intervention studies. We used 15 individual studies including 17 interventions for overall ES calculation; peer-led interventions reduced UAI with any sexual partners in meta-analysis (mean ES: -0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.41, -0.13; P<0.01). Subgroup analyses demonstrated a statistically significant reduction on UAI in quasi-experimental studies (mean ES: -0.30; 95% CI: -0.50, -0.09; P = 0.01) and serial cross-sectional intervention studies (mean ES: -0.33; 95% CI: -0.57, -0.09; P = 0.01), but non-significant reduction in RCTs (mean ES: -0.15; 95% CI: -0.36, 0.07; P = 0.18) or pre- and post-intervention studies (mean ES: -0.29; 95% CI: -0.69, 0.11; P = 0.15). Heterogeneity was large across these 15 studies (I2 = 77.5%; P<0.01), largely due to pre-and-post intervention studies and serial cross-sectional intervention studies.

CONCLUSIONS - Peer-led HIV prevention interventions reduced the overall UAI among MSM, but the efficacy varied by study design. More RCTs are needed to evaluate the effect of peer-led interventions while minimizing potential bias.

MeSH Terms (8)

Anal Canal Coitus Homosexuality, Male Humans Male Peer Group Publication Bias Unsafe Sex

Connections (1)

This publication is referenced by other Labnodes entities:

Links