Condom Social Marketing Effects in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review Update, 1990 to 2019

Michael D. Sweat, Teresa Yeh, Caitlin E Kennedy, Kevin O’Reilly, Kevin Armstrong, Virginia Fonner

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

Objective: To update the prior systematic review from studies published in the past 9 years that examine the effects of condom social marketing (CSM) programs on condom use in low- and middle-income countries. Data Sources: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, and EMBASE. Hand searching of AIDS, AIDS and Behavior, AIDS Care, and AIDS Education and Prevention. Study Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria: (a) Published from 1990 to January 16, 2019, (b) low- or middle-income country, (c) evaluated CSM, (d) analyses across preintervention to postintervention exposure or across multiple study arms, (e) measured condom use behavior, and (f) sought to prevent HIV transmission. Data Extraction: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, 2 reviewers extracted citation, inclusion criteria, methods, study population, setting, sampling, study design, unit of analysis, loss to follow-up, comparison group characteristics, intervention characteristics, and eligible outcome results. Data Synthesis: The 2012 review found 6 studies (combined N = 23 048). In a meta-analysis, the pooled odds ratio for condom use was 2.01 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.42-2.84) for the most recent sexual encounter and 2.10 (95% CI: 1.51-2.91) for a composite of all condom use outcomes. Studies had significant methodological limitations. Of 518 possible new citations identified in the update, no new articles met our inclusion criteria. Conclusions: More studies are needed with stronger methodological rigor to help provide evidence for the continued use of this approach globally. There is a dearth of studies over the past decade on the effectiveness of CSM in increasing condom use in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC).

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalAmerican Journal of Health Promotion
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Social Marketing
social marketing
Condoms
AIDS
income
inclusion
Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome
confidence
Meta-Analysis
exclusion
Confidence Intervals
Sampling Studies
Information Storage and Retrieval
PubMed
evidence
education
Group
Odds Ratio
HIV
Guidelines

Keywords

  • condom social marketing
  • condom use
  • HIV
  • systematic review

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health(social science)
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Condom Social Marketing Effects in Low- and Middle-Income Countries : A Systematic Review Update, 1990 to 2019. / Sweat, Michael D.; Yeh, Teresa; Kennedy, Caitlin E; O’Reilly, Kevin; Armstrong, Kevin; Fonner, Virginia.

In: American Journal of Health Promotion, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{29049fd777974ece8e87287d444de331,
title = "Condom Social Marketing Effects in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review Update, 1990 to 2019",
abstract = "Objective: To update the prior systematic review from studies published in the past 9 years that examine the effects of condom social marketing (CSM) programs on condom use in low- and middle-income countries. Data Sources: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, and EMBASE. Hand searching of AIDS, AIDS and Behavior, AIDS Care, and AIDS Education and Prevention. Study Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria: (a) Published from 1990 to January 16, 2019, (b) low- or middle-income country, (c) evaluated CSM, (d) analyses across preintervention to postintervention exposure or across multiple study arms, (e) measured condom use behavior, and (f) sought to prevent HIV transmission. Data Extraction: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, 2 reviewers extracted citation, inclusion criteria, methods, study population, setting, sampling, study design, unit of analysis, loss to follow-up, comparison group characteristics, intervention characteristics, and eligible outcome results. Data Synthesis: The 2012 review found 6 studies (combined N = 23 048). In a meta-analysis, the pooled odds ratio for condom use was 2.01 (95{\%} confidence interval [CI]: 1.42-2.84) for the most recent sexual encounter and 2.10 (95{\%} CI: 1.51-2.91) for a composite of all condom use outcomes. Studies had significant methodological limitations. Of 518 possible new citations identified in the update, no new articles met our inclusion criteria. Conclusions: More studies are needed with stronger methodological rigor to help provide evidence for the continued use of this approach globally. There is a dearth of studies over the past decade on the effectiveness of CSM in increasing condom use in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC).",
keywords = "condom social marketing, condom use, HIV, systematic review",
author = "Sweat, {Michael D.} and Teresa Yeh and Kennedy, {Caitlin E} and Kevin O’Reilly and Kevin Armstrong and Virginia Fonner",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0890117119864921",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "American Journal of Health Promotion",
issn = "0890-1171",
publisher = "American Journal of Health Promotion",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Condom Social Marketing Effects in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

T2 - A Systematic Review Update, 1990 to 2019

AU - Sweat, Michael D.

AU - Yeh, Teresa

AU - Kennedy, Caitlin E

AU - O’Reilly, Kevin

AU - Armstrong, Kevin

AU - Fonner, Virginia

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Objective: To update the prior systematic review from studies published in the past 9 years that examine the effects of condom social marketing (CSM) programs on condom use in low- and middle-income countries. Data Sources: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, and EMBASE. Hand searching of AIDS, AIDS and Behavior, AIDS Care, and AIDS Education and Prevention. Study Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria: (a) Published from 1990 to January 16, 2019, (b) low- or middle-income country, (c) evaluated CSM, (d) analyses across preintervention to postintervention exposure or across multiple study arms, (e) measured condom use behavior, and (f) sought to prevent HIV transmission. Data Extraction: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, 2 reviewers extracted citation, inclusion criteria, methods, study population, setting, sampling, study design, unit of analysis, loss to follow-up, comparison group characteristics, intervention characteristics, and eligible outcome results. Data Synthesis: The 2012 review found 6 studies (combined N = 23 048). In a meta-analysis, the pooled odds ratio for condom use was 2.01 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.42-2.84) for the most recent sexual encounter and 2.10 (95% CI: 1.51-2.91) for a composite of all condom use outcomes. Studies had significant methodological limitations. Of 518 possible new citations identified in the update, no new articles met our inclusion criteria. Conclusions: More studies are needed with stronger methodological rigor to help provide evidence for the continued use of this approach globally. There is a dearth of studies over the past decade on the effectiveness of CSM in increasing condom use in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC).

AB - Objective: To update the prior systematic review from studies published in the past 9 years that examine the effects of condom social marketing (CSM) programs on condom use in low- and middle-income countries. Data Sources: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, and EMBASE. Hand searching of AIDS, AIDS and Behavior, AIDS Care, and AIDS Education and Prevention. Study Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria: (a) Published from 1990 to January 16, 2019, (b) low- or middle-income country, (c) evaluated CSM, (d) analyses across preintervention to postintervention exposure or across multiple study arms, (e) measured condom use behavior, and (f) sought to prevent HIV transmission. Data Extraction: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, 2 reviewers extracted citation, inclusion criteria, methods, study population, setting, sampling, study design, unit of analysis, loss to follow-up, comparison group characteristics, intervention characteristics, and eligible outcome results. Data Synthesis: The 2012 review found 6 studies (combined N = 23 048). In a meta-analysis, the pooled odds ratio for condom use was 2.01 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.42-2.84) for the most recent sexual encounter and 2.10 (95% CI: 1.51-2.91) for a composite of all condom use outcomes. Studies had significant methodological limitations. Of 518 possible new citations identified in the update, no new articles met our inclusion criteria. Conclusions: More studies are needed with stronger methodological rigor to help provide evidence for the continued use of this approach globally. There is a dearth of studies over the past decade on the effectiveness of CSM in increasing condom use in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC).

KW - condom social marketing

KW - condom use

KW - HIV

KW - systematic review

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85069875103&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85069875103&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0890117119864921

DO - 10.1177/0890117119864921

M3 - Review article

C2 - 31337242

AN - SCOPUS:85069875103

JO - American Journal of Health Promotion

JF - American Journal of Health Promotion

SN - 0890-1171

ER -