What Do We Know About Interventions to Reduce Intersectional Stigma and Discrimination in the Context of HIV? A Systematic Review.

IF 1.7 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Stigma and Health Pub Date : 2023-08-01 Epub Date: 2022-10-20 DOI:10.1037/sah0000414
Anne L Stangl, Kaitlyn Atkins, Anna M Leddy, Kirsty M Sievwright, Jae M Sevelius, Sheri A Lippman, Maria Amélia Veras, Sophia Zamudio-Haas, M Kumi Smith, John E Pachankis, Carmen H Logie, Deepa Rao, Sheri Weiser, Laura Nyblade
{"title":"What Do We Know About Interventions to Reduce Intersectional Stigma and Discrimination in the Context of HIV? A Systematic Review.","authors":"Anne L Stangl, Kaitlyn Atkins, Anna M Leddy, Kirsty M Sievwright, Jae M Sevelius, Sheri A Lippman, Maria Amélia Veras, Sophia Zamudio-Haas, M Kumi Smith, John E Pachankis, Carmen H Logie, Deepa Rao, Sheri Weiser, Laura Nyblade","doi":"10.1037/sah0000414","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There is ample literature on interventions to reduce human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) stigma and discrimination and extant theory around intersectionality. However, the integration of intersectionality into the design and implementation of stigma reduction interventions is nascent. Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we reviewed 23 studies from six countries to examine the state of the evidence on interventions to reduce intersectional stigma in the context of HIV. Thirteen studies made explicit reference to intersectionality, 11 of which addressed all three stigma domains: drivers, facilitators, and manifestations. Most interventions were multilevel and multistrategy, yet only five included a structural component. Thirteen studies focused on four or more intersections (e.g., HIV, race, sexual identity, gender), five on three intersections, and five on two intersections. Twenty studies (87%) reported medium (n = 5) to high (n = 15) community engagement. The majority of studies (19/23) assessed HIV-related (e.g., antiretroviral therapy [ART] adherence) and/or empowerment-based outcomes (e.g., self-esteem, coping), with 91% reporting some positive intervention effects. Of 13 studies that measured stigma outcomes, only seven (54%) documented some improvement in the stigma measures assessed. Our review revealed a range of sophisticated, intersectionality-informed interventions that were mostly successful at improving HIV, sexual health, and empowerment-based outcomes, but less successful at reducing the aspects of stigma measured. Future research should encompass wider geographical regions, use validated measures of intersectional stigma, and test structural interventions and approaches that challenge the systems of power and oppression that fuel stigma, inequality, and poor health outcomes among multiply marginalized populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":53222,"journal":{"name":"Stigma and Health","volume":"53 1","pages":"393-408"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13095170/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stigma and Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/sah0000414","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/10/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is ample literature on interventions to reduce human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) stigma and discrimination and extant theory around intersectionality. However, the integration of intersectionality into the design and implementation of stigma reduction interventions is nascent. Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we reviewed 23 studies from six countries to examine the state of the evidence on interventions to reduce intersectional stigma in the context of HIV. Thirteen studies made explicit reference to intersectionality, 11 of which addressed all three stigma domains: drivers, facilitators, and manifestations. Most interventions were multilevel and multistrategy, yet only five included a structural component. Thirteen studies focused on four or more intersections (e.g., HIV, race, sexual identity, gender), five on three intersections, and five on two intersections. Twenty studies (87%) reported medium (n = 5) to high (n = 15) community engagement. The majority of studies (19/23) assessed HIV-related (e.g., antiretroviral therapy [ART] adherence) and/or empowerment-based outcomes (e.g., self-esteem, coping), with 91% reporting some positive intervention effects. Of 13 studies that measured stigma outcomes, only seven (54%) documented some improvement in the stigma measures assessed. Our review revealed a range of sophisticated, intersectionality-informed interventions that were mostly successful at improving HIV, sexual health, and empowerment-based outcomes, but less successful at reducing the aspects of stigma measured. Future research should encompass wider geographical regions, use validated measures of intersectional stigma, and test structural interventions and approaches that challenge the systems of power and oppression that fuel stigma, inequality, and poor health outcomes among multiply marginalized populations.

我们对减少艾滋病毒背景下交叉污名和歧视的干预措施了解多少?系统评价。
关于减少人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV)的污名和歧视的干预措施和现有的交叉理论有大量的文献。然而,将交叉性整合到减少病耻感干预措施的设计和实施中尚处于初期阶段。使用系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目,我们回顾了来自六个国家的23项研究,以检查在艾滋病毒背景下减少交叉污名的干预措施的证据状况。13项研究明确提到了交叉性,其中11项研究涉及所有三个耻辱领域:驱动因素、促进因素和表现形式。大多数干预措施是多层次和多策略的,但只有五个干预措施包括结构性成分。13项研究集中在四个或更多的交叉点(例如,艾滋病毒、种族、性身份、性别),5项研究集中在三个交叉点,5项研究集中在两个交叉点。20项研究(87%)报告了中等(n = 5)至高(n = 15)的社区参与。大多数研究(19/23)评估了与艾滋病毒相关(例如,抗逆转录病毒治疗[ART]依从性)和/或基于赋权的结果(例如,自尊,应对),91%的研究报告了一些积极的干预效果。在13项测量污名结果的研究中,只有7项(54%)记录了所评估的污名措施有所改善。我们的回顾揭示了一系列复杂的、相互交织的干预措施,这些干预措施在改善艾滋病毒、性健康和基于赋权的结果方面大多取得了成功,但在减少所测量的耻辱方面却不太成功。未来的研究应涵盖更广泛的地理区域,使用经验证的交叉污名测量方法,并测试结构性干预措施和方法,挑战权力和压迫系统,这些系统助长了污名、不平等和边缘化人群的不良健康结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Stigma and Health
Stigma and Health Multiple-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
94
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书