A new HIV prevention network approach: Sociometric peer change agent selection. (January 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Schneider, John A.; Zhou, A. Ning; Laumann, Edward O.
• Is Part Of: Social science & medicine. Volume 125(2015)
• Page Start: 192
• Page End: 202
• Publication Date: 2015-01
• Subjects: India -- HIV -- Peer change agent -- Network analysis -- Men who have sex with men -- HIV prevention -- Bridging -- Sociometric; Social medicine -- Periodicals; Medical anthropology -- Periodicals; Public health -- Periodicals; Psychology -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine sociale -- Périodiques; Anthropologie médicale -- Périodiques; Santé publique -- Périodiques; Psychologie -- Périodiques; Médecine -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; 362.105
• DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.12.034
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0277-9536

Abstract

Abstract: Internationally, the Peer Change Agent (PCA) model is the most frequently used conceptual framework for HIV prevention. Change agents themselves can be more important than the messages they convey. PCA selection is operationalized via heterogeneous methods based upon individual-level attributes. A sociometric position selection strategy, however, could increase peer influence potency and halt transmission at key network locations. In this study, we selected candidate PCAs based upon relative sociometric bridging and centrality scores and assessed their attributes in comparison to one another and to existing peer educators. We focused upon an emerging HIV epidemic among men who have sex with men in Southern India in 2011. PCAs selected based on their bridging score were more likely to be innovators when compared to other centrally-located PCAs, to PCAs located on the periphery, and to existing peer educators. We also found that sociodemographic attributes and risk behaviors were similar across all candidate PCAs, but risk behaviors of existing peer educators differed. Existing peer educators were more likely to engage in higher risk behavior such as receiving money for sex when compared to sociometrically selected peer changes agents. These existing peer educators were also more likely to exhibit leadership qualities within the overall network; they were, however, just as likely as other non-trained candidate peer change agents to report important HIV intravention behavior (encouraging condoms within their network). The importance of identifying bridges who may be able to diffuse innovation more effectively within high risk HIV networks is especially critical given recent efficacy data from novel HIV prevention interventions such as pre-exposure prophylaxis. Moreover, while existing peer educators were more likely to be leaders in our analysis, using peer educators with high risk behavior may have limited utility in enacting behavior change among sex worker peers or male clients in the network. Highlights: Bridging change agents are likely to be innovators. Peer educators engage in risky behavior. Peer educators also more likely to exhibit leadership qualities within the overall network.