Assessing Engagement of Adolescents and Young Adults (AYA) in HIV Research: A Multi-method Analysis of a Crowdsourcing Open Call and Typology of AYA Engagement in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Engagement of adolescents and young adults (AYA) in HIV research is increasing in many settings. We organized a crowdsourcing open call to solicit examples of how AYA have been engaged in HIV research in Africa and to develop an engagement typology. We formed a steering committee, promoted the open call, organized judging and recognized finalists. We used a multi-methods approach to identify emerging themes and measure engagement. We received 95 entries from individuals in 15 countries; 74 met the eligibility criteria. More than three-quarters of entries were from AYA (55/74, 74%). Four themes characterized AYA engagement: (1) AYA were co-creators in the HIV research process. (2) AYA were involved in community-level capacity building. (3) AYA were co-leaders in minor risk research. (4) AYA used digital methods to enhance engagement. Our open call identified diverse methods of AYA engagement, which can enhance strategies used to reach AYA in African HIV studies.

Pay-it-forward gonorrhea and chlamydia testing among men who have sex with men and male STD patients in China: the PIONEER pragmatic, cluster randomized controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Gonorrhea and chlamydia are the most common sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) among men who have sex with men (MSM) in China. Previous studies have shown pay-it-forward (PIF) interventions to be associated with a substantial increase in gonorrhea and chlamydia test uptake compared to standard-of-care. We propose a 'pay-it-forward' gonorrhea and chlamydia testing randomized controlled trial (PIONEER). The trial would evaluate the effectiveness of two pay-it-forward strategies in promoting testing uptake compared to the standard of care (in which men pay for their tests out-of-pocket) among MSM and male STD patients in China. METHODS: PIONEER will be a three-armed, pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT), conducted across 12 clinics (six MSM-led and six public STD clinics) to compare the effectiveness of three implementation strategies. Each facility will be randomized to a standard pay-it-forward intervention of gonorrhea/ chlamydia testing with minimal encouragement for testing, a community-engaged pay-it-forward arm, or a control arm where men pay for their tests out-of-pockets. The primary outcome will be dual gonorrhea/chlamydia test uptake. Secondary outcomes will include syphilis testing, amount donated in pay-it-forward, number of positive gonorrhea and chlamydia tests, and measures of antimicrobial resistance. A sequential transformative mixed methods design will be used to evaluate the implementation process in type 2 effectiveness-implementation hybrid design. Data sources will include survey on acceptability, and feelings and attitudes towards the interventions among participants; testing and treatment uptake data from clinic records, WeChat records, and qualitative data to gain insights into men's perceptions and attitudes towards the pay-it-forward, mechanisms driving uptake, and donating behaviors. Implementers and organizers will be interviewed about fidelity and adherence to protocol, sustainability of pay-it-forward intervention, and barriers and facilitators of implementing the intervention. DISCUSSION: PIONEER will substantially increase gonorrhea/chlamydia testing among MSM in China, providing an innovative and new financial mechanism to sustain STD screening among sexual minorities in low- and middle-income countries. This study will answer compelling scientific questions about how best to implement pay-it-forward and the individual and organizational characteristics that moderate it. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study with identification number NCT05723263 has been registered on clinicaltrials.gov/.

The International Sexual Health And REproductive Health during COVID-19 (I-SHARE) Study: A Multicountry Analysis of Adults from 30 Countries Prior to and During the Initial Coronavirus Disease 2019 Wave.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence to date about changes to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) during the initial wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To address this gap, our team organized a multicountry, cross-sectional online survey as part of a global consortium. METHODS: Consortium research teams conducted online surveys in 30 countries. Sampling methods included convenience, online panels, and population-representative. Primary outcomes included sexual behaviors, partner violence, and SRH service use, and we compared 3 months prior to and during policy measures to mitigate COVID-19. We conducted meta-analyses for primary outcomes and graded the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: Among 4546 respondents with casual partners, condom use stayed the same for 3374 (74.4%), and 640 (14.1%) reported a decline. Fewer respondents reported physical or sexual partner violence during COVID-19 measures (1063 of 15 144, 7.0%) compared to before COVID-19 measures (1469 of 15 887, 9.3%). COVID-19 measures impeded access to condoms (933 of 10 790, 8.7%), contraceptives (610 of 8175, 7.5%), and human immunodeficiency virus/sexually transmitted infection (HIV/STI) testing (750 of 1965, 30.7%). Pooled estimates from meta-analysis indicate that during COVID-19 measures, 32.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.9%-42.1%) of people needing HIV/STI testing had hindered access, 4.4% (95% CI, 3.4%-5.4%) experienced partner violence, and 5.8% (95% CI, 5.4%-8.2%) decreased casual partner condom use (moderate certainty of evidence for each outcome). Meta-analysis findings were robust in sensitivity analyses that examined country income level, sample size, and sampling strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Open science methods are feasible to organize research studies as part of emergency responses. The initial COVID-19 wave impacted SRH behaviors and access to services across diverse global settings.

Increasing Men's Engagement in HIV Testing and Treatment Programs Through Crowdsourcing: A Mixed-Methods Analysis in Eswatini.

BACKGROUND: Sub-Saharan African HIV programs have had limited success in engaging men. Crowdsourcing contests may be a useful method to spur men's engagement in HIV services. We evaluated contributions and social media response to a crowdsourcing contest focused on increasing men's engagement in Eswatini HIV services. METHODS: We conducted a crowdsourcing contest to gain insight from the public on how HIV campaigns can more effectively engage young (20-40 years old) men in HIV services. Eligible submissions included images, songs, videos, and Internet memes. We used standard qualitative methods to examine textual themes from submissions. We examined social media response using Facebook analytics, comparing the number of people reached through crowdsourced HIV messages and the number of people reached through conventional HIV messages. RESULTS: We received 144 submissions from 83 participants. They represented 55 towns and all 4 regions of Eswatini. The contest page gained 461 followers on Facebook. Emergent themes included appealing to men's roles as protectors by suggesting that they need to take care of their own health to continue safeguarding their families. Crowdsourced messages reached a mean of 88 individuals across 4 posts; conventional messages reached a mean of 75 individuals across 4 posts. CONCLUSIONS: Crowdsourcing contest submissions provided insight on how to encourage men to engage in Eswatini HIV services. Crowdsourcing contests can be effective in collecting messages from men to create more locally relevant communication materials for HIV programs.

Using orthopaedic health care resources efficiently: A cost analysis of day surgery for unicompartmental knee replacement.

BACKGROUND: Day surgery for unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) could potentially reduce hospital costs. We aimed to measure the impact of introducing a day surgery UKR pathway on mean length of stay (LOS) and costs for the UK NHS, compared to an accelerated inpatient pathway. Secondly, the study aimed to compare the magnitude of costs using three costing approaches: top-down costing; simple micro-costing; and real-world costing. METHODS: We conducted an observational, before-and-after study of 2,111 UKR patients at one NHS hospital: 1,094 patients followed the day surgery pathway between September 2017 and February 2020; and 1,017 patients followed the accelerated inpatient pathway between September 2013 and February 2016. Top-down costs were estimated using Average NHS Costs. Simple micro-costing used the cost per bed-day. Real-world costs for this centre were estimated by costing actual changes in staffing levels. RESULTS: 532 (48.5%) patients in the day surgery pathway were discharged on the day of surgery compared with 36 (3.5%) patients in the accelerated inpatient pathway. The day surgery pathway reduced the mean LOS by 2.2 (95% CI: 1.81, 2.53) nights and was associated with an 18% decrease in Average NHS Costs (p < 0.001). Mean savings were £1,429 per patient with the Average NHS Costs approach, £905 per patient with the micro-costing approach, and £577 per patient with the "real-world" costing approach. Overall, moving NHS UKR surgeries to a day surgery pathway could save the NHS £8,659,740 per year. CONCLUSION: Day surgery for UKR could produce substantial cost savings for hospitals and the NHS.

Prosocial Interventions and Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Prosocial interventions encourage voluntary actions that benefit others. Community solidarity in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, expanding mutual aid programs, and health workforce issues have accelerated prosocial health interventions. Objective: To investigate the association of prosocial interventions with health outcomes in clinical trials and observational studies. Data Sources: In this systematic review and meta-analysis informed by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, 5 databases (MEDLINE [via PubMed], Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and Scopus) were searched from database inception through February 23, 2023. The search included terms for altruism and prosocial behaviors, health outcomes, and study type. Study Selection: Included studies, determined by multiple reviewers, compared health outcomes in a prosocial intervention group with a nonintervention group. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline, data extraction and synthesis captured quantitative and qualitative data. To pool data from quantitative studies, random-effects meta-analyses were used to estimate the impact of prosocial interventions. To combine data from quantitative and qualitive studies, data were transformed into qualitative narratives using meta-aggregation. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was whether prosocial interventions were associated with improved health outcomes. Barriers to and facilitators of implementation of these interventions were assessed. Results: The search identified 5229 citations; 30 studies were included in the synthesis. Studies indicated that prosocial interventions were associated with positive health outcomes for givers (17 studies [56.7]) and recipients (8 [26.7%]). Prosocial interventions included acts of kindness (12 studies [40.0%]), cash gifts (7 [23.3%]), pay-it-forward approaches (6 [20.0%]), and expressions of kindness (5 [16.7%]). Improvements were reported in depression, testing for sexually transmitted diseases, vaccine uptake, physical activity, and individual biomarkers. Data from 6 studies (20.0%) demonstrated that pay-it-forward approaches were associated with increased uptake of diagnostic tests or vaccines among vulnerable groups (moderate certainty of evidence). Data from 14 studies (46.7%) suggested that community connectedness facilitated prosocial interventions. Shared vulnerabilities among groups (eg, sexual minority individuals, older adults) may provide a context for collective mobilization to improve health in local communities. Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review and meta-analysis found that prosocial interventions were associated with improved health outcomes among vulnerable groups and have been useful for addressing health disparities. Further research is needed to develop and evaluate prosocial interventions.

Intimate Partner Violence During COVID-19 Restrictions: A Study of 30 Countries From the I-SHARE Consortium.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) causes substantial physical and psychological trauma. Restrictions introduced in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, including lockdowns and movement restrictions, may exacerbate IPV risk and reduce access to IPV support services. This cross-sectional study examines IPV during COVID-19 restrictions in 30 countries from the International Sexual HeAlth and REproductive Health (I-SHARE) study conducted from July 20th, 2020, to February, 15th, 2021. IPV was a primary outcome measure adapted from a World Health Organization multicountry survey. Mixed-effects modeling was used to determine IPV correlates among participants stratified by cohabitation status. The sample included 23,067 participants from 30 countries. A total of 1,070/15,336 (7.0%) participants stated that they experienced IPV during COVID-19 restrictions. A total of 1,486/15,336 (9.2%) participants stated that they had experienced either physical or sexual partner violence before the restrictions, which then decreased to 1,070 (7.0%) after the restrictions. In general, identifying as a sexual minority and experiencing greater economic vulnerability were associated with higher odds of experiencing IPV during COVID-19 restrictions, which were accentuated among participants who were living with their partners. Greater stringency of COVID-19 restrictions and living in urban or semi-urban areas were associated with lower odds of experiencing IPV in some settings. The I-SHARE data suggest a substantial burden of IPV during COVID-19 restrictions. However, the restrictions were correlated with reduced IPV in some settings. There is a need for investing in specific support systems for survivors of IPV during the implementation of restrictions designed to contain infectious disease outbreaks.

Evaluating and volunteering for crowdsourced interventions: Cross-sectional data on COVID-19 safety from a University Survey.

Despite many innovative ideas generated in response to COVID-19, few studies have examined community preferences for these ideas. Our study aimed to determine university community members' preferences for three novel ideas identified through a crowdsourcing open call at the University of North Carolina (UNC) for making campus safer in the pandemic, as compared to existing (i.e. pre-COVID-19) resources. An online survey was conducted from March 30, 2021 -May 6, 2021. Survey participants included UNC students, staff, faculty, and others. The online survey was distributed using UNC's mass email listserv and research directory, departmental listservs, and student text groups. Collected data included participant demographics, COVID-19 prevention behaviors, preferences for finalist ideas vs. existing resources in three domains (graduate student supports, campus tours, and online learning), and interest in volunteering with finalist teams. In total 437 survey responses were received from 228 (52%) staff, 119 (27%) students, 78 (18%) faculty, and 12 (3%) others. Most participants were older than age 30 years (309; 71%), women (332, 78%), and white (363, 83.1%). Five participants (1%) were gender minorities, 66 (15%) identified as racial/ethnic minorities, and 46 (10%) had a disability. Most participants preferred the finalist idea for a virtual campus tour of UNC's lesser-known history compared to the existing campus tour (52.2% vs. 16.0%). For graduate student supports, 41.4% of participants indicated no preference between the finalist idea and existing supports; for online learning resources, the existing resource was preferred compared to the finalist idea (41.6% vs. 30.4%). Most participants agreed that finalists' ideas would have a positive impact on campus safety during COVID-19 (81.2%, 79.6%, and 79.2% for finalist ideas 1, 2 and 3 respectively). 61 (14.1%) participants indicated interest in volunteering with finalist teams. Together these findings contribute to the development and implementation of community-engaged crowdsourced campus safety interventions during COVID-19.

Assessment of a Crowdsourcing Open Call for Approaches to University Community Engagement and Strategic Planning During COVID-19.

Importance: Reimagining university life during COVID-19 requires substantial innovation and meaningful community input. One method for obtaining community input is crowdsourcing, which involves having a group of individuals work to solve a problem and then publicly share solutions. Objective: To evaluate a crowdsourcing open call as an approach to COVID-19 university community engagement and strategic planning. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study assessed a crowdsourcing open call offered from June 16 to July 16, 2020, that sought ideas to inform safety in the fall 2020 semester at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC). Digital methods (email and social media) were used for promotion, and submissions were collected online for 4 weeks. Participation was open to UNC students, staff, faculty, and others. Main Outcomes and Measures: Submissions were evaluated for innovation, feasibility, inclusivity, and potential to improve safety and well-being. Demographic data were collected from submitting individuals, and submissions were qualitatively analyzed for emergent themes on challenges with and solutions for addressing safety and well-being in the fall semester. Data were shared with UNC leadership to inform decision-making. Results: The open call received 82 submissions from 110 participants, including current UNC students (56 submissions [68%]), people younger than 30 years (67 [82%]), women (55 [67%]), and individuals identifying as a racial/ethnic minority or as multiracial/ethnic (49 [60%]). Seven submissions were identified as finalists and received cash prizes with the encouragement to use these funds toward idea development and implementation. Seventeen runner-up teams were linked to university resources for further development. Thematic analysis of submissions regarding challenges with the fall semester revealed not only physical health concerns and the limitations of remote learning but also challenges that have been exacerbated by the pandemic, such as a lack of mental health support, structural racism and inequality, and insufficient public transportation. Solutions included novel ideas to support mental health among specific populations (eg, graduate students and racial/ethnic minorities), improve health equity, and increase transit access. All 24 finalists and runners-up indicated interest in implementation after being notified of the open call results. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that open calls are a feasible strategy for university community engagement on COVID-19, providing a stakeholder-driven approach to identifying promising ideas for enhancing safety and well-being. Open calls could be formally incorporated into university planning processes to develop COVID-19 safety strategies that are responsive to diverse community members' concerns.

The International Sexual Health And Reproductive Health Survey (I-SHARE-1): A Multi-Country Analysis of Adults from 30 Countries Prior to and During the Initial COVID-19 Wave.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic forced billions of people to shelter in place, altering social and sexual relationships worldwide. In many settings, COVID-19 threatened already precarious health services. However, there is limited evidence to date about changes to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) during the initial wave of COVID-19 disease. To address this gap, our team organized a multi-country, cross-sectional online survey as part of a global consortium. METHODS: Consortium research teams conducted online surveys in 30 countries. Sampling methods included convenience, online panels, and population-representative. Primary outcomes included sexual behaviors, partner violence, and SRH service utilization, and we compared three months prior to and three months after policy measures to mitigate COVID-19. We used established indicators and analyses pre-specified in our protocol. We conducted meta-analyses for primary outcomes and graded the certainty of the evidence using Cochrane methods. Descriptive analyses included 22,724 individuals in 25 countries. Five additional countries with sample sizes <200 were included in descriptive meta-analyses. RESULTS: Respondents were mean age 34 years; most identified as women (15160; 66.7%), cis-gender (19432; 86.6%) and heterosexual (16592; 77.9%). Among 4546 respondents with casual partners, condom use stayed the same for 3374 (74.4%) people and 640 (14.1%) people reported a decline. Fewer respondents reported physical or sexual partner violence during COVID-19 measures (1063/15144, 7.0%) compared to the period before COVID-19 measures (1469/15887, 9.3%). COVID-19 measures impeded access to condoms (933/10790, 8.7%), contraceptives (610/8175, 7.5%), and HIV/STI testing (750/1965, 30.7%). Pooled estimates from meta-analysis indicate during COVID-19 measures, 32.3% (95% CI 23.9-42.1) of people needing HIV/STI testing had hindered access, 4.4% (95% CI 3.4-5.4) experienced partner violence, and 5.8% (95% CI 5.4-8.2) decreased casual partner condom use (moderate certainty of evidence for each outcome). Meta-analysis findings were robust in sensitivity analyses that examined country income level, sample size, and sampling strategy. CONCLUSION: Open science methods are feasible to organize research studies as part of emergency responses. The initial COVID-19 wave impacted SRH behaviors and access to services across diverse global settings.