Heckman 2011.
Methods |
Trial design: 3‐arm RCT Follow‐up: baseline, post, 4 months, and 8 months follow‐up Loss to follow‐up: coping group 79% loss, interpersonal support group 69% loss, individual therapy group 86% loss. |
|
Participants |
Population: 295 men and women over the age of 50, intervention = 104, control = 105. Inclusion: 50 years or older, a diagnosis of HIV infection or AIDS, a BDI‐II score of 10 or higher, a score of 75 or more on the 3MS, a minimum value of 10 on the BDI‐II. (A minimum value of 10 on the BDI‐II was used to ensure that participants had a minimally elevated number of depressive symptoms that had the potential to be reduced by the interventions). Exclusion: the project did not exclude individuals with alcohol or substance use disorders, active bipolar disorder, psychotic symptoms, or individuals receiving psychotherapy. |
|
Interventions |
Treatment: N = 104. Coping improvement group intervention addressed introductions and participants' sharing of personal histories (Session 1 and 2) appraisal and changeability of stressors related to one's HIV infection and stressors related to normal ageing (Sessions 3 and 4); developing and implementing adaptive problem‐ and emotion‐focused coping skills (Sessions 5 through 9); optimizing coping efforts through the use of interpersonal supports (Session 10 and 11); and termination issues and voluntary sharing of personal contact information (Session 12)
Treatment: N = 105. Interpersonal Support Group of 12 x 90‐minute group sessions (5 minutes spent on viewing and discussing videotapes on HIV‐related topics of nutrition, treatment, adherence, sexual risk reduction, 45 minutes spent discussing how the sessions' topic pertained to their personal lives). Facilitators: 2 Masters‐level clinicians Control: N = 86. Individual Therapy Upon Request (ITUR) Group had access to standard psychosocial community‐based services. |
|
Outcomes |
Included in review
Not included in the review
|
|
Notes |
Setting: community Country: Ohio and New York, USA. Each 90‐minute group conducted separately for MSM, heterosexual men, and women. |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | The trial authors described the trial as "randomized" but did not provide any further details. |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | The trial authors did not describe selection bias, if any. |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) Anxiety | Unclear risk | The trial authors did not describe the method of blinding, if any. |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | The trial authors did not describe the method of blinding, if any. |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | High risk | Losses to follow‐up: 15.4% intervention group versus 31.4% control. |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | We did not detect any selective reporting bias. |
Other bias | Low risk | We did not detect any other sources of bias. |