Table 3.

Risk ratios (RR), risk differences (RD; %) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the potential effect of various interventions on receipt of a child support grant (CSG) at each visit paired with caregiver care at each visit, eliminating adolescent depression at enrollment, eliminating IPV at enrollment, high attendance in school at each visit, or receipt of the CCT intervention at enrollment on incident HIV infection at 4 years of follow up among South Africa AGYW enrolled in HPTN 068

	CSG plus Caregiver care	CSG plus No depression	CSG plus No IPV	CSG plus High school attendance	CSG plus CCT
Total effect
Risk under observed (%, 95%CI)	5.6 (3.5, 7.6)	5.6 (3.5, 7.6)	5.6 (3.5, 7.6)	5.6 (3.5, 7.6)	5.6 (3.5, 7.6)
Risk under all exposed (%, 95%CI)	2.9 (0.2, 5.6)	3.8 (1.5, 6.1)	4.5 (1.9, 7.2)	4.2 (1.6, 6.9)	3.9 (− 0.9, 8.7)
RD (%)	− 2.6 (− 4.7, − 0.6)	− 1.7 (− 3.0, − 0.4)	− 1.0 (− 2.4, 0.4)	− 1.3(− 2.7, 0.1)	− 1.7 (− 5.1, 1.8)
RR	0.52 (0.29, 0.96)	0.69 (0.49, 0.97)	0.82 (0.59, 1.14)	0.76 (0.55, 1.07)	0.70 (0.2, 2.1)
Interaction contrast (IC)*	− 5.25%	− 0.32%	0.19%	6.85%	− 1.67%

Bold if confidence intervals for risk differences do not cross null value of 0 and for risk ratios do not cross null value of 1

*IC < 0 indicates a net increase in the inverse effect with joint exposure (synergism; IC > 0 indicates a net reduction in the inverse effects with joint exposure (antagonism). IC = 0 if R₁₁−R₀₀ = (R₁₀−R₀₀) + (R₀₁−R₀₀) [60]l