Rhodes 2009.
Methods |
Study design: controlled before‐after study Sampling frame: 30 Latino soccer teams in central North Carolina Sampling method: data collected from random sample of teammates from intervention and control teams Collection method: questionnaire administered by staff member Description of the community coalition: Chatham Communities In Action (CCIA) is a partnership between the local Latino community, local health organizations, religious organizations, Latino‐serving CBOs, advocacy groups, the local public health department, and academic institutions conducting community‐based participatory research |
|
Participants |
Communities: 30 Latino soccer teams in central North Carolina Country: USA Ages included in assessment: > 18 years of age (n = 222) Reasons provided for selection of intervention community: population of recently arrived, non‐English‐speaking Latino men in central North Carolina, a region of the USA with a quickly growing Latino population and disproportionately high rates of HIV and STD infection Intervention community (population size): Chatham County — 55,000 Comparison community (population size): not reported |
|
Interventions |
Name of intervention: HoMBRes (Hombres Manteniendo Bienestar y Relaciones Saludables) Theory: Social Cognitive and Empowerment Theory Aim: to reduce risk of HIV and STD infection among Latino migrant and seasonal farmworkers through increased condom use and increased counseling, testing, and treatment for HIV and STDs Description of costs and resources: not reported Components of the intervention: selection and training of members of local soccer teams as pilot lay health advisors (LHAs) to reduce HIV and STD infection among recently arrived, non‐English‐speaking Latino men; creation of HoMBRes training and resources manuals Start date: October 2003 Duration: 18 months |
|
Outcomes |
Outcomes and measures: condom use, HIV testing, behavior, knowledge of HIV transmission Time points: baseline, 18‐month post‐Navegante training |
|
Notes | Members of control teams were offered intervention when study was completed Funder: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Funding source: government |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | High risk | No randomization |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | High risk | Allocation concealment not reported |
Baseline outcome measurement similar | Unclear risk | Baseline measurement not reported separately for intervention and control groups |
Baseline characteristics similar | Low risk | No statistically significant differences between intervention and control participants’ sociodemographic characteristics (P > 0.05 for all) |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | High risk | No blinding reported |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Independent samples imply no attrition |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | Blinding not reported |
Protection against contamination | Low risk | Teams chosen from geographically and socially distinct areas to minimize contamination |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Relevant outcomes reported |