Spillover HIV prevention effects of a cash transfer trial in East Zimbabwe: evidence from a cluster-randomised trial and
- PDF / 1,795,098 Bytes
- 20 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 39 Downloads / 196 Views
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Open Access
Spillover HIV prevention effects of a cash transfer trial in East Zimbabwe: evidence from a cluster-randomised trial and general-population survey Robin Schaefer1* , Ranjeeta Thomas2, Laura Robertson3, Jeffrey W. Eaton1, Phyllis Mushati4, Constance Nyamukapa1,5, Katharina Hauck1 and Simon Gregson1,5
Abstract Background: Benefits of cash transfers (CTs) for HIV prevention have been demonstrated largely in purposively designed trials, commonly focusing on young women. It is less clear if CT interventions not designed for HIV prevention can have HIV-specific effects, including adverse effects. The cluster-randomised Manicaland Cash Transfer Trial (2010–11) evaluated effects of CTs on children’s (2–17 years) development in eastern Zimbabwe. We evaluated whether this CT intervention with no HIV-specific objectives had unintended HIV prevention spillover effects (externalities). Methods: Data on 2909 individuals (15–54 years) living in trial households were taken from a general-population survey, conducted simultaneously in the same communities as the Manicaland Trial. Average treatment effects (ATEs) of CTs on sexual behaviour (any recent sex, condom use, multiple partners) and secondary outcomes (mental distress, school enrolment, and alcohol/cigarette/drug consumption) were estimated using mixed-effects logistic regressions (random effects for study site and intervention cluster), by sex and age group (15–29; 30–54 years). Outcomes were also evaluated with a larger synthetic comparison group created through propensity score matching. Results: CTs did not affect sexual debut but reduced having any recent sex (past 30 days) among young males (ATE: − 11.7 percentage points [PP] [95% confidence interval: -26.0PP, 2.61PP]) and females (− 5.68PP [− 15.7PP, 4.34PP]), with similar but less uncertain estimates when compared against the synthetic comparison group (males: -9.68PP [− 13.1PP, − 6.30PP]; females: -8.77PP [− 16.3PP, − 1.23PP]). There were no effects among older individuals. Young (but not older) males receiving CTs reported increased multiple partnerships (8.49PP [− 5.40PP, 22.4PP]; synthetic comparison: 10.3PP (1.27PP, 19.2PP). No impact on alcohol, cigarette, or drug consumption was found. There are indications that CTs reduced psychological distress among young people, although impacts were small. CTs increased school enrolment in males (11.5PP [3.05PP, 19.9PP]). Analyses with the synthetic comparison group (but not the original control group) further indicated increased school enrolment among females (5.50PP [1.62PP, 9.37PP]) and condom use among younger and older women receiving CTs (9.38PP [5.90PP, 12.9PP]; 5.95PP [1.46PP, 10.4PP]). (Continued on next page)
* Correspondence: [email protected] 1 MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, London, UK Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © The Author(s). 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative
Data Loading...
