↓ Skip to main content

A hybrid design testing a 3-step implementation model for community scale-up of an HIV prevention intervention in rural Malawi: study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
231 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A hybrid design testing a 3-step implementation model for community scale-up of an HIV prevention intervention in rural Malawi: study protocol
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5800-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Diana L. N. Jere, Chimwemwe K. Banda, Lily C. Kumbani, Li Liu, Linda L. McCreary, Chang Gi Park, Crystal L. Patil, Kathleen F. Norr

Abstract

Scaling-up evidence-based behavior change interventions can make a major contribution to meeting the UNAIDS goal of no new HIV infections by 2030. We developed an evidence-based peer group intervention for HIV prevention and testing in Malawi that is ready for wider dissemination. Our innovative approach turns over ownership of implementation to rural communities. We adapted a 3-Step Implementation Model (prepare, roll-out and sustain) for communities to use. Using a hybrid design, we simultaneously evaluate community implementation processes and program effectiveness. Three communities in southern Malawi begin implementation in randomly-assigned order using a stepped wedge design. Our evaluation sample size of 144 adults and 144 youth per community provides sufficient power to examine primary outcomes of condom use and HIV testing. Prior to any implementation, the first participants in all three communities are recruited and complete the Wave 1 baseline survey. Waves 2-4 surveys occur after each community completes roll-out. Each community follows the model's three steps. During Prepare, the community develops a plan and trains peer group leaders. During Roll-Out, peer leaders offer the program. During Sustain, the community makes and carries out plans to continue and expand the program and ultimately obtain local funding. We evaluate degree of implementation success (Aim 1) using the community's benchmark scores (e.g, # of peer groups held). We assess implementation process and factors related to success (Aim 2) using repeated interviews and observations, benchmarks from Aim 1 and fidelity assessments. We assess effectiveness of the peer group intervention when delivered by communities (Aim 3) using multi-level regression models to analyze data from repeated surveys. Finally, we use mixed methods analyses of all data to assess feasibility, acceptability and sustainability (Aim 4). The project is underway, and thus far the first communities have enthusiastically begun implementation. We have had to make several modifications along the way, such as moving from rapid-tests of STIs to symptoms screening by a nurse due to problems with test reliability and availability. If successful, results will provide a replicable evidence-based model for future community implementation of this and other health interventions. Clinical Trials.gov NCT02765659 Registered May 6, 2016.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 231 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 231 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 33 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 10%
Student > Bachelor 22 10%
Researcher 13 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 5%
Other 40 17%
Unknown 87 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 51 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 40 17%
Social Sciences 13 6%
Psychology 8 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 2%
Other 26 11%
Unknown 88 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 August 2018.
All research outputs
#5,831,565
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#5,830
of 15,063 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,797
of 331,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#169
of 317 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,063 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,122 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 317 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.