Table 2.

Theory-informed HIV Prevention Intervention Studies Focused on Substance Using and Substance-Involved Women

SETTING	FEMALE SAMPLE	REVIEW INCLUSION CRITERIA	THEORETICAL FOCUS or §APPROACH	STUDY NAME
Mexico34, 35,a	N = 584 FSW-IDU	SU Type: IDU	SCT, TRA §MI approach	Mujer Mas Segura
		HIV Risk: Sexual risk, IDU behaviors
		Risk Level: Individual
United States23,b	N =521 Incarcerated Women	SU Type: IDU, Substance use	AIDS Risk Reduction Model Syndemics	Project Power
		HIV Risk: Sexual risk, Substance use, IPV
		Risk Level: Individual, Social, Structural
United States21,c	N = 548 Low-income Hispanic Women	SU Type: Problem drinking	SCT §Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed	SEPA
		HIV Risk: Sexual risk, Alcohol use, IPV
		Risk Level: Individual
United States26	N = 311 At-risk non-IDU Women	SU Type: Non-IDU illicit drug use	SCT	Unity Study
		HIV Risk: Sexual risk, HIV vaccine
		Risk Level: Individual
Puerto Rico38,d	N = 100 At-risk Heterosexual Women	SU Type: IDU and Crack use	Used theoretical concepts related to SCT, TRA, §MI approach	RReduC-PR
		HIV Risk: Individualized risk-reduction plans
		Risk Level: Individual
United States33,e	N = 366 HIV+ Women	SU Type: Alcohol use	SCT Theory of Gender & Power	The WiLLOW Program
		HIV Risk: Sexual risk
		Risk Level: Individual, Social
South Africa36,f	N = 93 Black South African Cocaine Using FSW	SU Type: Cocaine use, Alcohol use	SCT Theory of Gender & Power §Empowerment approach	Women-focused HIV Prevention
		HIV Risk: Sexual Risk, Substance use, Violence
		Risk Level: Individual, Sex dyad
US Virgin Is.37	N = 191 formative 20 pilot Indigent Substance Abusing Women	SU Type: Substance abuse	SCT, HBM §Empowerment approach	The Virgin Is. Women's Intervention
		HIV Risk: Sexual risk
		Risk Level: Individual, Social
United States27	N = 54 Drug using FSW	SU Type: Heroin or Cocaine use	SCT §Economic Enhancement Framework	JEWEL Project
		HIV Risk: Sexual risk, Drug use, Income options
		Risk Level: Individual, Economic
United States28, 29	N = 333 African American Drug Using Women	SU Type: Active IDU and/or Crack use	SCT, TRA, TpB Transtheoretical Model Theory of Gender & Power	HIP House
		HIV Risk: Sexual risk, Drug use, IDU behaviors
		Risk Level: Individual, Social
United States25	N = 13 IDI 9 ethnography visits Cis and Transgender Homeless Women	SU Type: Substance use	§feminist Ethnography Social Network Theory	Ladies' Night
		HIV Risk: Sexual risk, Drug use, Safety
		Risk Level: Individual, Social, Structural
United States30	N = 541 African American Drug Using Women	SU Type: IDU and Crack use	Integrated behavior change models (TRA, SCT, HBM, SLT), using gendered themes to tailor content (i.e., cooking)	Miami Cares
		HIV Risk: Sexual risk, Drug risk behaviors
		Risk Level: Individual
United States31, 32 (21 sites)g	N = 1,403 Drug Using Women	SU Type: IDU and Crack use	HBM, SLT Fear Arousal Theory Social Influence Theory	NIDA Cooperative Agreement
		HIV Risk: Sexual risk, Drug risk behaviors
		Risk Level: Individual
Austrailia39,h	N = 92 Pregnant IDU on Methadone	SU Type: Enrolled in Methadone treatment	Relapse Prevention Model Transtheoretical Model §Problem-solving strategies §MI approach	CBT Relapse Prevention
		HIV Risk: Sexual risk, Drug use, IDU behaviors
		Risk Level: Individual
United States24	N = 145 Drug Abusing Women in Jail	SU Type: Illicit drug use	SCT, HBM §Behavioral/cognitive skills §Problem-solving strategies §Social support & Help seeking §Empowerment approach	Social Support Enhancement
		HIV Risk: Sexual risk
		Risk Level: Individual
United States22	N = 91 Black and Hispanic Women on Methadone	SU Type: Enrolled in Methadone treatment	SCT	Skills Building Group
		HIV Risk: Sexual risk, Drug use
		Risk Level: Individual

NOTE: (See Tables, Supplemental Digital Content 1, for citations regarding supporting articles, specific theories, and guiding approaches).

^§Identifies a general approach to behavior change or a guiding framework/approach used in the analysis and/or interpretation of the data that does not specify theoretical mechanisms of HIV risk per se.

Sample size is in reference to intervention participants unless otherwise noted.

Abbreviations: SU Type = Type of substance use or substance involvement specified in the target population; IDU = Intravenous Drug User; FSW = Female Sex worker; IDI = In-depth interview; IPV = Intimate partner violence; SCT = Social Cognitive Theory; TRA = Theory of Reasoned Action, MI = Motivational Interviewing, HBM = Health Belief Model, TpB = Theory of Planned Behavior, SLT = Social Learning Theory.

Comments regarding intervention development and/or descriptions obtained from our reviewed articles:

^aIntervention details and theoretical foci was abstracted from Vera et al. (2012).

^bDetails on Project Power, as adapted from a CDC Evidence-based Intervention Project SAFE, was obtained from Fogel et al. (2014).

^cSEPA (Salud Educacion Promocion y Autocuidado) was adapted from a previous version of the study with low-income Latina women.

^dRReduC-PR (Risk Reduction Counseling – Puerto Rico) adapted from RESPECT-2.

^eIntervention details on WILLOW (women involved in life learning from other women) were abstracted from Wingood et al. (2004).

^fIntervention was adapted from work with crack using African American females in the United states.

^gOnly used data from the 21 unspecified sites of the 23 cooperative agreement sites in the United States, Puerto Rico, and Brazil.

^hIntervention details abstracted from Baker et al. (1993).