Anti-Stigma Interventions to Encourage HIV Testing in Vulnerable Households in Mozambique

Last registered on December 01, 2019

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Anti-Stigma Interventions to Encourage HIV Testing in Vulnerable Households in Mozambique
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0004120
Initial registration date
April 21, 2019

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
April 22, 2019, 11:20 AM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Last updated
December 01, 2019, 11:05 PM EST

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
Peking University

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2019-05-06
End date
2019-11-17
Secondary IDs
Abstract
This study aims to test whether providing information that intends to relieve individuals concerns about HIV-related social stigma improves HIV testing rates in vulnerable households in Mozambique. Based on a local social opinion survey before this study, the treatment group will receive individually-tailored information indicating supportive social opinions about HIV in their neighborhood. The primary outcome of interest is the usage of HIV-testing coupons, which will be distributed to all study participants and redeemable upon taking an HIV test in the local clinic.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Yu, Hang. 2019. "Anti-Stigma Interventions to Encourage HIV Testing in Vulnerable Households in Mozambique." AEA RCT Registry. December 01. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.4120-1.2000000000000002
Former Citation
Yu, Hang. 2019. "Anti-Stigma Interventions to Encourage HIV Testing in Vulnerable Households in Mozambique." AEA RCT Registry. December 01. https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/4120/history/57932
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Before this study, a social opinion survey was conducted in the study communities to collect local residents' attitudes about HIV. The survey suggests that the public usually holds very supportive views towards people living with HIV and that the HIV-related stigma is less than many people had believed. Participants in this study will be asked to guess the results of the social opinion survey, and those in the treatment group will be informed of the results after that if they overestimate the HIV-related stigma in their neighborhood.
Intervention (Hidden)
Anti-Stigma Treatment Procedures

The intervention will be embedded into the household survey conducted primarily for the study "Direct and Spillover Impacts of a Community-Level HIV/AIDS Program (FCC)" (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03880175), where rich household and individual level characteristics will be collected during a home visit.

The following three questions on HIV-related stigma were asked in the social opinion survey.
J17 Would you buy fresh vegetables from a shopkeeper or vendor if you knew that this person had HIV?
J19 If a member of your family became sick with AIDS would you be willing to care for them in your own household?
J20 In your opinion, if a teacher has HIV but is not sick, should they be allowed to continue teaching at school?

We summarized the answers to these three questions of the survey respondents. Let x17, x19, and x20 be the shares of respondents answered “yes” to question J17, J18, and J19, respectively. The table below shows the values of x17, x18, and x19 in each study community. Note that very high shares of respondents answered “yes,” indicating relatively low rates of HIV-related stigma. The anti-stigma treatment will reveal these very low rates of stigmatizing attitudes to respondents, potentially reducing stigma concerns and thereby raising HIV testing rates.

In this study, the respondent will be asked to guess the share of people in their neighborhood answering “yes” to each of the three questions above (i.e., guess the values of x17, x19, and x20). Specifically, the respondent will be asked the following three questions:
J17a If I ask the question, “Would you buy fresh vegetables from a shopkeeper or vendor if you knew that this person had HIV?”, to 10 people in your neighborhood, how many of them, would you expect, to say “Yes”? (guess the value of x17)
J19a If I ask the question, “If a member of your family became sick with AIDS would you be willing to care for them in your own household?”, to 10 people in your neighborhood, how many of them, would you expect, to say “Yes”? (guess the value of x19)
J20a If I ask the question, “In your opinion, if a teacher has HIV but is not sick, should they be allowed to continue teaching at school?”, to 10 people in your neighborhood, how many of them, would you expect, to say “Yes”? (guess the value of x20)

Let the answers of the respondent to question J17a, J19a, and J20a in the study survey be y17, y19, and y20 , respectively. If y17 < x17, then, it suggests that the respondent has overestimated the HIV-related stigma in their community. In this case, we will reveal to him or her the true value of x17 in the respondent’s community. If y17>= x17, we will not reveal x17. The same rule applies to the pairs of (y19, x19) and (y20, x20) as well.

If a participant answered in such a way that y17>=x17, y19>=x19, and y20>=x20, then, the anti-stigma treatment will not apply to this respondent.

Enumerator Narrative:
In an earlier social opinion survey, we asked people in your neighborhood questions about their attitudes towards HIV/AIDS. We would like to share with you how people responded to these questions.
If y17>=x17 for this respondent, then the enumerator skips the succeeding two paragraphs. Otherwise, the enumerator says:
In the survey we just finished, you guessed that [the survey software automatically inserts the respondent’s answer to question J17a] out of 10 people in your community would answer “yes” to the question, “Would you buy fresh vegetables from a shopkeeper or vendor if you knew that this person had HIV?”.
We did ask this question to people in your community in the earlier survey. They answered “yes” to this question more often than you think they would. Our data show that [insert the value of x17 for the respondent’s community, see the table below] out of 10 of the people answered “yes”, indicating that the vast majority of respondents are supportive of people living with HIV.
If y19>=x19 for this respondent, then the enumerator skips the succeeding two paragraphs. Otherwise, the enumerator says:
In the survey we just finished, you guessed that [the survey software automatically inserts the respondent’s answer to question J19a] out of 10 people in your community would answer “yes” to the question, “If a member of your family became sick with AIDS would you be willing to care for them in your own household?”.
We did ask this question to people in your community in the earlier survey. They answered “yes” to this question more often than you think they would. Our data show that [insert the value of x19 for the respondent’s community, see the table below] of the people answered “yes”, indicating that the majority of respondents are supportive of people living with HIV.
If y20>=x20 for this respondent, then the enumerator skips the succeeding two paragraphs. Otherwise, the enumerator says:
In the survey we just finished, you guessed that [the survey software automatically inserts the respondent’s answer to question J20a] out of 10 people in your community would answer “yes” to the question, “In your opinion, if a teacher has HIV but is not sick, should they be allowed to continue teaching at school?”.
We did ask this question to people in your community in the earlier survey. They answered “yes” to this question more often than you think they would. Our data show that [insert the value of x20 for the respondent’s community, see the table below] of the people answered “yes”, indicating that the majority of the respondents are supportive of people living with HIV.

Table:
Community Name The share of respondents answered "yes" to question J17 (i.e., x17) The share of respondents answered "yes" to question J19 (i.e., x19) The share of respondents answered "yes" to question J20 (i.e., x20)
EPC de Chipinde 92.5% 96.8% 92.3%
EPC de Munhonha 93.6% 99.1% 96.3%
ES do Dondo 86.8% 96.2% 91.4%
ES de Macharote 75.0% 94.3% 85.4%
EPC 25 de Setembro CFM 81.3% 98.9% 95.4%
EPC 7 de Abril - Matadouro 87.5% 99.0% 93.8%
EPC de Centro de Acomodação - Mach 75.0% 91.8% 87.5%
EPC C.A.de Cheringoma - Dondo 68.4% 85.4% 75.0%
EPC Samora M. Machel 72.6% 84.3% 76.3%
EPC de Mussassa 67.5% 85.7% 71.4%
EPC de Monte Siluvo 87.1% 100.0% 87.5%
EPC de Nharuchonga 79.2% 98.6% 89.7%
EPC de 3 de Fevereiro 88.9% 95.5% 85.7%
EPC 25 de Setembro 91.5% 96.7% 94.2%
EPC 12 de Outubro 89.3% 98.2% 91.1%
EPC Acordos de Lusaka 81.8% 100.0% 89.5%
ES de Tica 93.3% 96.8% 93.7%
ES de Metuchira 79.0% 98.5% 84.9%
EPC de Muda - Gondola 71.6% 89.7% 87.0%
EPC 1 de Maio - Gondola 81.1% 96.1% 94.7%
EPC de Eduardo Mondlane - Mucorodzi 72.6% 82.8% 88.9%
EPC de Cafumpe 75.0% 95.9% 90.4%
ES Josina Machel 88.1% 95.3% 93.8%
ES de Macombe 72.8% 94.1% 91.7%
EPC de Mussiquir 64.5% 87.5% 87.1%
EPC de Bela Vista - Gondola 72.4% 93.2% 86.0%
EPC de Cabeça do Velho 83.6% 80.9% 86.8%
EPC da Fepom 89.2% 97.3% 93.2%
EPC de Nhamaonha 79.7% 89.4% 87.9%
EPC 25 de Setembro 86.9% 100.0% 96.6%
EPC do Centro Hípico 78.7% 95.2% 91.9%
EPC de Nhamadjessa 74.3% 90.3% 91.5%
EPC 7 de Setembro 81.2% 97.1% 88.4%
EPC 7 de Abril 89.2% 95.5% 98.4%
EPC 1 de Junho 80.3% 92.4% 88.3%
EPC de Mudzingadzi 92.8% 94.5% 93.2%
ES da Soalpo 73.1% 94.2% 86.8%
ES Eduardo Mondlane 83.3% 84.6% 83.3%
ES da Vila Nova 72.2% 91.3% 86.1%
ES 7 de Abril 73.5% 95.7% 95.4%
ES de Messica 62.9% 88.2% 79.4%
EPC Eduardo Mondlane 77.3% 80.3% 81.5%
EPC de Vumba 82.0% 86.0% 84.0%
EPC Messica Aldeia 78.9% 89.5% 84.2%
EPC de Manhate 72.2% 79.2% 83.3%
EPC Estevao Dimaka 75.0% 72.9% 71.4%
EPC de Manica 71.7% 87.0% 92.5%

Intervention Start Date
2019-05-06
Intervention End Date
2019-10-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The indicator of HIV-testing coupon redemption within 14 days, individual level
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
The indicator of HIV-testing coupon redemption within 14 days, household level; Willingness-to-Accept (WTA) for an HIV-testing coupon
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The potential participating households will be assigned to different study groups (treatment and control) randomly by computer before being recruited. The group assignment will be blind to enumerators. A household's group status will only be revealed at the end of the household survey. Only individuals from a treatment household will receive the intervention. All eligible individuals will receive HIV-testing coupons for themselves and for their children, regardless of which study group they are in. Instructions on how to redeem a coupon will be given at the end of the household visit.

Each coupon will be linked to an individual by a unique barcode printed on it. The study team will redeem the coupons at the collaborating clinics during a 14-day window and scan the coupons redeemed to determine usage.
Experimental Design Details
At the end of the household survey, the study team will distribute one HIV-testing coupon to each eligible adult survey respondent and each eligible children. (Adult coupons will be distributed in person, child coupons will be distributed to the primary guardian). Each coupon has a value of 50 Mts (~$0.83) and is valid 14 days. A coupon is redeemable at the designated health center when someone presents proof of HIV-testing with the coupon to the research staff on site. The payment will be made in digital cash through MPesa . There is a unique barcode on each coupon that allows the researcher to link the use of the coupon to one’s survey responses.
Randomization Method
Randomization done in office by a computer
Randomization Unit
household
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
1500 households
Sample size: planned number of observations
3000 individual adults
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
750 households control; 750 households treatment
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
University of Michigan Health Sciences and Behavioral Sciences Institutional Review Board
IRB Approval Date
2018-12-20
IRB Approval Number
HUM00113011
Analysis Plan

Analysis Plan Documents

PAP Stigma and HIV Testing

MD5: 57b1e203107eb674368a64119109c6a6

SHA1: 9593f0f63d0696917bcf43804f8c15c6a0345bfa

Uploaded At: April 21, 2019

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
Yes
Intervention Completion Date
October 30, 2019, 12:00 +00:00
Data Collection Complete
Yes
Data Collection Completion Date
November 17, 2019, 12:00 +00:00
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization)
Was attrition correlated with treatment status?
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials