Intersectional StigmaCHHARGENCT05692531
Evaluation of A Story Within A Story: The Novel CHHARGE Intervention Component
A study testing A Story Within A Story in people with Intersectional Stigma, run by City University of New York.
Trial summary
Using a quasi-experimental evaluation approach, the purpose of this study is to assess feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a novel community-level intervention component, which is a filmed dramatization or set of "scenarios" to be "screened" in a virtual event. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Intersectional Stigma
- What is being tested?
- A Story Within A Story
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 100 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 1 Mar 2023to 31 May 2023
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- all attendees of the event
Who cannot join
- none
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet.
About this study
Official title: Optimizing Study Design to Test a Community-level Intervention to Reduce Intersectional Stigma and Increase HIV Testing and Prevention Among African-American/Black MSM
Using a quasi-experimental evaluation approach, the purpose of this study is to assess feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a novel community-level intervention component, which is a filmed dramatization or set of "scenarios" to be "screened" in a virtual event. Attendees will be polled and engaged in an evaluation of the scenarios, before during and after the screening. This NCT registration is for the final aim of the study as described in the detailed description (AIMS) below. (Please note Aims 1-2 are complete.)
Read the detailed description
Increasing access to and uptake of consistent HIV testing and biomedical prevention is critical to ending the epidemic in the United States (US) among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with other men (MSM). This is particularly true for urban, African-American/Black MSM, who are disproportionately affected by HIV/AIDS in the US2-4 and would thus benefit from consistent testing, which is the gateway to treatment and prevention. NYC is the metropolitan area in the US with the largest number of newly diagnosed HIV infections among MSM and 89-94% of all people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) in the US reside in urban areas. HIV stigma is a key barrier to HIV treatment and prevention, reducing access to testing and anti-retroviral treatment (ART). Stigmas specific to biomedical prevention (e.g., PrEP/PEP stigma) and HIV testing have emerged and influence intentions to use PrEP/PEP and testing. In addition, homophobia has been identified as a barrier to prevention access, with structural homophobia negatively associated with PEP awareness and PrEP use. Intersectional HIV-related stigmas and homophobia may be especially significant barriers to HIV testing and prevention among African-American/Black MSM, who test less often and are more likely to live with undiagnosed HIV/AIDS compared with white MSM. African-American/Black MSM live in a racist society, which operates at the personal and institutional levels. This results in experiences of HIV-related stigma and homophobia being racialized, further inhibiting access to and uptake of testing, prevention and treatment.
Interventions to decrease HIV stigma have aimed primarily at the individual level and on internalized stigma and/or personal attitudes, providing education and increased contact with PLWHA to reduce stereotyping and active discrimination. Few have addressed HIV stigma and homophobia simultaneously or at the community level. One exception, designed and evaluated by study team leaders, Frye \& Taylor-Akutagawa, is CHHANGE (Challenge HIV/AIDS Stigma \& Homophobia and Gain Empowerment; R21 MH102182-01; PI: Frye), a community-level, theory-based, anti-stigma and -homophobia intervention. Designed for African-American urban neighborhoods with high HIV prevalence, and broadly framed within socioecological, empowerment and stigma theories, CHHANGE focused on: enhancing visibility; increasing contact with LGBTQ people and PLWHA; educating on stigmatization processes and effects; enhancing empathy and perspective-taking; challenging stereotyped beliefs; raising critical consciousness; and teaching skills to analyze and interrupt stigma \& homophobia in organizations, families and individuals. Results of the quasi-experimental, matched-community study found that HIV testing increased by 350% at the intervention community site, though changes in community-level HIV stigma and homophobia were not statistically significant across communities.
The emergence of PEP/PrEP and testing stigmas highlight a gap in our HIV testing and prevention toolbox for MSM of color and a need for interventions that address intersectional stigmas. To our knowledge, no intervention addresses intersectional HIV, PrEP/PEP, testing stigmas, and homophobia, in the context of racism. To address this gap, the investigators propose an R34 to adapt and enhance CHHANGE to simultaneously address intersectional stigmas and plan a trial to test the community-level intervention.
The Specific Aims are:
- Inform design of novel components specific to PrEP/PEP and testing stigma. The investigators will conduct group model building (GMB), a systems science technique, with community residents and African-American/Black MSM (N=80) to understand the intersectional complexity of HIV-related stigmas, homophobia, and racism, in context, and identify novel levers that may influence consistent HIV testing and prevention uptake.
- Systematically adapt the CHHANGE intervention to integrate novel anti-stigma, -homophobia, and -racism content and activities (re-named CHHARGE: Challenge HIV Stigma, Homophobia and Racism and Gain Empowerment) and plan a pilot using optimal study design methods. The investigators will ideate, prototype and component test (N=30), using design thinking and traditional adaptation methods, novel modules and components in the community. With input from a Senior Advisory Board (SAB), the investigators will identify optimal study design features (around areal boundaries, "big data" outcome measures, sampling, contamination, lagged effects) for planning a trial of the community-level intervention (e.g., a community cluster randomized trial).
- Assess feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of novel component. The investigators will conduct a quasi-experimental evaluation to assess feasibility of the novel component. The investigators will assess preliminary efficacy of the component in reducing community-level stigmas (HIV, PrEP/PEP, testing) by increasing likelihood of engaging in stigma interrupting communication and behavior, particularly as related to the theoretical targets identified via Phases 1 and 2, as well as likelihood of consistent HIV testing and PrEP/PEP uptake.
Thus far, the research has completed phases 1 and 2 in partnership with Mobilizing Our Brother Initiative (MOBI) creating an innovative module that facilitates consistent HIV testing, and access to, uptake of and adherence to new biomedical HIV prevention modalities, with the goal of lowering community-level viral load and ultimately a diminution of the HIV epidemic among urban, Black MSM in the US.
- Conditions
- Intersectional Stigma
- Being tested
- A Story Within A Story
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
A Story Within A StoryBehavioural
Also called CHHARGE novel component
The intervention is the screening via Zoom of "A Story Within A Story," two dramatized scenarios. The first depicts a reinforcing feedback loop connecting internalized, anticipated and enacted HIV stigma and serosorting within the Black SGL/MSM community. Set during the COVID-19 pandemic, it depicts a Zoom call among three generations of Black SGL/MSM, a chosen family. In this scene, the oldest member of the family, not knowing that the youngest has just tested positive for HIV, describes how they would never partner with someone who was living with HIV because of what they saw at the beginning of the HIV epidemic. The middle-aged member attempts to mitigate the damage done by this, while the youngest member describes what kind of support he needs. The second scenario depicts a Telehealth visit between a young Black gay man and his sexual health provider; his older lover joins the call at one point and the focus is on sexual communication and PrEP use.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| A Story Within A Story | Experimental | This is a single event that will be evaluated using quasi-experimental design methods. Receives: Behavioral: A Story Within A Story |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
internalized/anticipated HIV stigma
single-item, adapted, self-reported internalized/anticipated HIV stigma; we will use an item from Sayles et al (2008) valid and reliable measure of internalized/anticipated stigma (for example "I am living with HIV and feel ashamed when I tell people that I have HIV/I am not living with HIV but would feel ashamed if I had to tell people that I have HIV"). This item is adapted from Sayles, J. N., Hays, R. D., Sarkisian, C. A., Mahajan, A. P., Spritzer, K. L., \& Cunningham, W. E. (2008). Development and psychometric assessment of a multidimensional measure of internalized HIV stigma in a sample of HIV-positive adults. AIDS and Behavior, 12(5), 748-758.
Measured: immediately post-intervention
internalized homophobia
single-item, self-reported internalized HIV stigma; we will use items from a valid and reliable measure of internalized homophobia (Smolenski et al 2010; for example "I would change myself to be heterosexual, if I could") From: Smolenski, D. J., Diamond, P. M., Ross, M. W., \& Rosser, B. S. (2010). Revision, criterion validity, and multigroup assessment of the Reactions to Homosexuality Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment,92, 568-576
Measured: immediately post-intervention
internalized/anticipated PrEP stigma
single-item, self-reported PrEP stigma; we will use an item from a measure of PrEP stigma (Frye et al 2020) (for example "People who who use PrEP are having too much sex or sex with the wrong kinds of people") From: Chittamuru, D., Frye, V., Koblin, B. A., Brawner, B., Tieu, H. V., Davis, A., \& Teitelman, A. M. (2020). PrEP stigma, HIV stigma, and intention to use PrEP among women in New York City and Philadelphia. Stigma and health, 5(2), 240.
Measured: immediately post-intervention
HIV testing stigma
single-item, self-reported HIV testing stigma; we will use an item adapted from a measure of HIV testing stigma (for example "if people know I get HIV tests frequently, they will think I am promiscuous or am having sex with men") From: Andrinopoulos, K., Hembling, J., Guardado, M. E., de Maria Hernández, F., Nieto, A. I., \& Melendez, G. (2015). Evidence of the negative effect of sexual minority stigma on HIV testing among MSM and transgender women in San Salvador, El Salvador. AIDS and Behavior, 19(1), 60-71.
Measured: immediately post-intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Jan 2023
- Study start1 Mar 2023 (estimated)
- Primary completion31 May 2023 (estimated)
- Study completion31 May 2023 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Intersectional StigmaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Model description
- This is an evaluation of a virtual event. The investigators will conduct a social media metrics analysis (of the social media-based run-up to the event as well as the actual event) via responses to polls embedded within the social media-based run-up, and sentiment assessment and analysis during the event itself. The investigators will conduct "flash polls" during the event using sentiments that reflect key stigmatization process-related aspects of the scenarios being depicted, for example asking attendees to rate the actors on specific qualities on a scale of 1 to 10 (for example, "respect" "admire" "dislike" "annoyed" "tactful" "sensitive" "shady" etc.); the investigators will repeat this after the scenarios are screened and integrate the immediate results into the discussion of the filmed scenarios. The investigators will conduct flash polls on confidence confronting stigmatizing language toward someone who is considering taking PrEP.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- City University of New York
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Victoria Frye, City University of New York
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05692531
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- R34MH121295
- Acronym
- CHHARGE
- Status last verified
- Jan 2023
- First submitted
- 22 Dec 2022
- Last updated
- 20 Jan 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided: Because this is a quasi-experimental evaluation of an event, it is unclear if the data would be of any use to any other researchers other than this team.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Jan 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Optimizing Study Design to Test a Community-level Intervention to Reduce Intersectional Stigma and Increase HIV Testing and Prevention Among African-American/Black MSM
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05692531
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CHHARGE / R34MH121295
- Conditions
- Intersectional Stigma
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- City University of New YorkUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Mar 2023 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 31 May 2023 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 May 2023 (estimated)
- First posted
- 20 Jan 2023 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Using a quasi-experimental evaluation approach, the purpose of this study is to assess feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a novel community-level intervention component, which is a filmed dramatization or set of "scenarios" to be "screened" in a virtual event. Attendees will be polled and engaged in an evaluation of the scenarios, before during and after the screening. This NCT registration is for the final aim of the study as described in the detailed description (AIMS) below. (Please note Aims 1-2 are complete.)
Detailed description
Increasing access to and uptake of consistent HIV testing and biomedical prevention is critical to ending the epidemic in the United States (US) among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with other men (MSM). This is particularly true for urban, African-American/Black MSM, who are disproportionately affected by HIV/AIDS in the US2-4 and would thus benefit from consistent testing, which is the gateway to treatment and prevention. NYC is the metropolitan area in the US with the largest number of newly diagnosed HIV infections among MSM and 89-94% of all people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) in the US reside in urban areas. HIV stigma is a key barrier to HIV treatment and prevention, reducing access to testing and anti-retroviral treatment (ART). Stigmas specific to biomedical prevention (e.g., PrEP/PEP stigma) and HIV testing have emerged and influence intentions to use PrEP/PEP and testing. In addition, homophobia has been identified as a barrier to prevention access, with structural homophobia negatively associated with PEP awareness and PrEP use. Intersectional HIV-related stigmas and homophobia may be especially significant barriers to HIV testing and prevention among African-American/Black MSM, who test less often and are more likely to live with undiagnosed HIV/AIDS compared with white MSM. African-American/Black MSM live in a racist society, which operates at the personal and institutional levels. This results in experiences of HIV-related stigma and homophobia being racialized, further inhibiting access to and uptake of testing, prevention and treatment.
Interventions to decrease HIV stigma have aimed primarily at the individual level and on internalized stigma and/or personal attitudes, providing education and increased contact with PLWHA to reduce stereotyping and active discrimination. Few have addressed HIV stigma and homophobia simultaneously or at the community level. One exception, designed and evaluated by study team leaders, Frye \& Taylor-Akutagawa, is CHHANGE (Challenge HIV/AIDS Stigma \& Homophobia and Gain Empowerment; R21 MH102182-01; PI: Frye), a community-level, theory-based, anti-stigma and -homophobia intervention. Designed for African-American urban neighborhoods with high HIV prevalence, and broadly framed within socioecological, empowerment and stigma theories, CHHANGE focused on: enhancing visibility; increasing contact with LGBTQ people and PLWHA; educating on stigmatization processes and effects; enhancing empathy and perspective-taking; challenging stereotyped beliefs; raising critical consciousness; and teaching skills to analyze and interrupt stigma \& homophobia in organizations, families and individuals. Results of the quasi-experimental, matched-community study found that HIV testing increased by 350% at the intervention community site, though changes in community-level HIV stigma and homophobia were not statistically significant across communities.
The emergence of PEP/PrEP and testing stigmas highlight a gap in our HIV testing and prevention toolbox for MSM of color and a need for interventions that address intersectional stigmas. To our knowledge, no intervention addresses intersectional HIV, PrEP/PEP, testing stigmas, and homophobia, in the context of racism. To address this gap, the investigators propose an R34 to adapt and enhance CHHANGE to simultaneously address intersectional stigmas and plan a trial to test the community-level intervention.
The Specific Aims are:
- Inform design of novel components specific to PrEP/PEP and testing stigma. The investigators will conduct group model building (GMB), a systems science technique, with community residents and African-American/Black MSM (N=80) to understand the intersectional complexity of HIV-related stigmas, homophobia, and racism, in context, and identify novel levers that may influence consistent HIV testing and prevention uptake.
- Systematically adapt the CHHANGE intervention to integrate novel anti-stigma, -homophobia, and -racism content and activities (re-named CHHARGE: Challenge HIV Stigma, Homophobia and Racism and Gain Empowerment) and plan a pilot using optimal study design methods. The investigators will ideate, prototype and component test (N=30), using design thinking and traditional adaptation methods, novel modules and components in the community. With input from a Senior Advisory Board (SAB), the investigators will identify optimal study design features (around areal boundaries, "big data" outcome measures, sampling, contamination, lagged effects) for planning a trial of the community-level intervention (e.g., a community cluster randomized trial).
- Assess feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of novel component. The investigators will conduct a quasi-experimental evaluation to assess feasibility of the novel component. The investigators will assess preliminary efficacy of the component in reducing community-level stigmas (HIV, PrEP/PEP, testing) by increasing likelihood of engaging in stigma interrupting communication and behavior, particularly as related to the theoretical targets identified via Phases 1 and 2, as well as likelihood of consistent HIV testing and PrEP/PEP uptake.
Thus far, the research has completed phases 1 and 2 in partnership with Mobilizing Our Brother Initiative (MOBI) creating an innovative module that facilitates consistent HIV testing, and access to, uptake of and adherence to new biomedical HIV prevention modalities, with the goal of lowering community-level viral load and ultimately a diminution of the HIV epidemic among urban, Black MSM in the US.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
- Model description
- This is an evaluation of a virtual event. The investigators will conduct a social media metrics analysis (of the social media-based run-up to the event as well as the actual event) via responses to polls embedded within the social media-based run-up, and sentiment assessment and analysis during the event itself. The investigators will conduct "flash polls" during the event using sentiments that reflect key stigmatization process-related aspects of the scenarios being depicted, for example asking attendees to rate the actors on specific qualities on a scale of 1 to 10 (for example, "respect" "admire" "dislike" "annoyed" "tactful" "sensitive" "shady" etc.); the investigators will repeat this after the scenarios are screened and integrate the immediate results into the discussion of the filmed scenarios. The investigators will conduct flash polls on confidence confronting stigmatizing language toward someone who is considering taking PrEP.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| A Story Within A Story | Experimental | Behavioral: A Story Within A StoryThis is a single event that will be evaluated using quasi-experimental design methods. |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- all attendees of the event
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- none
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| A Story Within A StoryAlso: CHHARGE novel componentThe intervention is the screening via Zoom of "A Story Within A Story," two dramatized scenarios. The first depicts a reinforcing feedback loop connecting internalized, anticipated and enacted HIV stigma and serosorting within the Black SGL/MSM community. Set during the COVID-19 pandemic, it depicts a Zoom call among three generations of Black SGL/MSM, a chosen family. In this scene, the oldest member of the family, not knowing that the youngest has just tested positive for HIV, describes how they would never partner with someone who was living with HIV because of what they saw at the beginning of the HIV epidemic. The middle-aged member attempts to mitigate the damage done by this, while the youngest member describes what kind of support he needs. The second scenario depicts a Telehealth visit between a young Black gay man and his sexual health provider; his older lover joins the call at one point and the focus is on sexual communication and PrEP use. | Behavioural | A Story Within A Story |
Primary outcome
internalized/anticipated HIV stigma
Time frame: immediately post-intervention
single-item, adapted, self-reported internalized/anticipated HIV stigma; we will use an item from Sayles et al (2008) valid and reliable measure of internalized/anticipated stigma (for example "I am living with HIV and feel ashamed when I tell people that I have HIV/I am not living with HIV but would feel ashamed if I had to tell people that I have HIV"). This item is adapted from Sayles, J. N., Hays, R. D., Sarkisian, C. A., Mahajan, A. P., Spritzer, K. L., \& Cunningham, W. E. (2008). Development and psychometric assessment of a multidimensional measure of internalized HIV stigma in a sample of HIV-positive adults. AIDS and Behavior, 12(5), 748-758.
internalized homophobia
Time frame: immediately post-intervention
single-item, self-reported internalized HIV stigma; we will use items from a valid and reliable measure of internalized homophobia (Smolenski et al 2010; for example "I would change myself to be heterosexual, if I could") From: Smolenski, D. J., Diamond, P. M., Ross, M. W., \& Rosser, B. S. (2010). Revision, criterion validity, and multigroup assessment of the Reactions to Homosexuality Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment,92, 568-576
internalized/anticipated PrEP stigma
Time frame: immediately post-intervention
single-item, self-reported PrEP stigma; we will use an item from a measure of PrEP stigma (Frye et al 2020) (for example "People who who use PrEP are having too much sex or sex with the wrong kinds of people") From: Chittamuru, D., Frye, V., Koblin, B. A., Brawner, B., Tieu, H. V., Davis, A., \& Teitelman, A. M. (2020). PrEP stigma, HIV stigma, and intention to use PrEP among women in New York City and Philadelphia. Stigma and health, 5(2), 240.
HIV testing stigma
Time frame: immediately post-intervention
single-item, self-reported HIV testing stigma; we will use an item adapted from a measure of HIV testing stigma (for example "if people know I get HIV tests frequently, they will think I am promiscuous or am having sex with men") From: Andrinopoulos, K., Hembling, J., Guardado, M. E., de Maria Hernández, F., Nieto, A. I., \& Melendez, G. (2015). Evidence of the negative effect of sexual minority stigma on HIV testing among MSM and transgender women in San Salvador, El Salvador. AIDS and Behavior, 19(1), 60-71.
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 Jan 2023.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided. Because this is a quasi-experimental evaluation of an event, it is unclear if the data would be of any use to any other researchers other than this team.
Related trials for Intersectional Stigma
Recruiting
Adaptation and Evaluation of an Intersectional Stigma Reduction Intervention to Increase HIV Care Engagement Among Women Who Use Drugs
HIV
RecruitingPhase 1
KABAWIL: Reducing Intersectional Stigmas
Stigma, Social
Active, not recruiting
Developing and Testing a Digital Health Tool for INterseCtional Stigma Assessment and Reduction at Multiple Levels and mUltiple DimEnsions (INCLUDE) to Improve HIV Care in ART Centers in Nepal
HIV Care Loss to Followup, HIV Antiretroviral Therapy (ART) Adherence
Recruiting
Group-based Integrative Pain Management in Primary Care Safety Net Clinics
Chronic Pain
Active, not recruiting
Lafiya HIV Self-testing Study Protocol
HIV Prevention and Care
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing A Story Within A Story in people with Intersectional Stigma, run by City University of New York.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 Jan 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Victoria Frye, DrPH (6464186435, VFrye@med.cuny.edu), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
internalized/anticipated HIV stigma (time frame: immediately post-intervention). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 20 Jan 2023.