Suchergebnisse

AbstractAs international female labour migration has increased, so too have efforts to prevent the exploitation of labour migrants. However, evidence to underpin prevention efforts remains limited, with little known about labour migrants' migration planning processes. Using data from a survey of female prospective labour migrants from Nepal, this article compares socio‐demographics and migration‐planning processes between first‐time and repeat‐migrants. We identified several factors which might increase repeat‐migrants' vulnerability to exploitation during the migration process, or obstruct their engagement in pre‐migration interventions: more rapid migration planning than first‐time migrants; lower involvement in community groups; and a perception that they already have the knowledge they need. Only one‐third of repeat‐migrants planned to go to the same destination and 42 per cent to work in the same sector as previously. With repeat‐migration a common livelihoods strategy, it is crucial that interventions are guided by evidence on the needs of both first‐time‐ and repeat‐migrants.

IntroductionYoung women aged 15 to 24 years in sub‐Saharan Africa continue to be disproportionately affected by HIV. A growing number of studies have suggested that the practice of transactional sex may in part explain women's heightened risk, but evidence on the association between transactional sex and HIV has not yet been synthesized. We set out to systematically review studies that assess the relationship between transactional sex and HIV among men and women in sub‐Saharan Africa and to summarize the findings through a meta‐analysis.MethodsThe search strategy included 8 databases, hand searches in 10 journals, and searches across 17 websites and portals for organizations as informed by expert colleagues. A systematic review of cross‐sectional and longitudinal studies was carried out for studies on women and men who engage in transactional sex published up through 2014. Random effects meta‐analysis was used to further examine the relationship between transactional sex and prevalent HIV infection across a subset of studies with the same exposure period. Analyses were conducted separately for men and women.ResultsNineteen papers from 16 studies met our inclusion criteria. Of these 16 studies, 14 provided data on women and 10 on men. We find a significant, positive, unadjusted or adjusted association between transactional sex and HIV in 10 of 14 studies for women, one of which used a longitudinal design (relative risk (RR)=2.06, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.22 –3.48). Out of 10 studies involving men, only 2 indicate a positive association between HIV and transactional sex in unadjusted or adjusted models. The meta‐analysis confirmed general findings from the systematic review (unadjusted meta‐analysis findings are significant for women (n=4; pooled odds ratio (OR)=1.54, 95% CI: 1.04–2.28; I2=42.5%, p=0.156), but not for men (n=4; pooled OR=1.47, 95% CI: 0.85–2.56; I2=50.8%, p=0.107).ConclusionsTransactional sex is associated with HIV among women, whereas findings for men were inconclusive. Given that only two studies used a longitudinal approach, there remains a need for better measurement of the practice of transactional sex and additional longitudinal studies to establish the causal pathways between transactional sex and HIV.

Abstract Background Evidence from armed conflict settings points to high levels of intimate partner violence (IPV) against women. Current knowledge on how to prevent IPV is limited—especially within war-affected settings. To inform prevention programming on gender-based violence in settings affected by conflict, we evaluated the impact of adding a targeted men's intervention to a community-based prevention programme in Côte d'Ivoire. Methods We conducted a two-armed, non-blinded cluster randomized trial in Côte d'Ivoire among 12 pair-matched communities spanning government-controlled, UN buffer, and rebel–controlled zones. The intervention communities received a 16-week IPV prevention intervention using a men's discussion group format. All communities received community-based prevention programmes. Baseline data were collected from couples in September 2010 (pre-intervention) and follow-up in March 2012 (one year post-intervention). The primary trial outcome was women's reported experiences of physical and/or sexual IPV in the last 12 months. We also assessed men's reported intention to use physical IPV, attitudes towards sexual IPV, use of hostility and conflict management skills, and participation in gendered household tasks. An adjusted cluster-level intention to treat analysis was used to compare outcomes between intervention and control communities at follow-up. Results At follow-up, reported levels of physical and/or sexual IPV in the intervention arm had decreased compared to the control arm (ARR 0.52, 95% CI 0.18-1.51, not significant). Men participating in the intervention reported decreased intentions to use physical IPV (ARR 0.83, 95% CI 0.66-1.06) and improved attitudes toward sexual IPV (ARR 1.21, 95% CI 0.77-1.91). Significant differences were found between men in the intervention and control arms' reported ability to control their hostility and manage conflict (ARR 1.3, 95% CI 1.06-1.58), and participation in gendered household tasks (ARR 2.47, 95% CI 1.24-4.90). Conclusions This trial points to the value of adding interventions working with men alongside community activities to reduce levels of IPV in conflict-affected settings. The intervention significantly influenced men's reported behaviours related to hostility and conflict management and gender equitable behaviours. The decreased mean level of IPV and the differences between intervention and control arms, while not statistically significant, suggest that IPV in conflict-affected areas can be .

BACKGROUND: Evidence from armed conflict settings points to high levels of intimate partner violence (IPV) against women. Current knowledge on how to prevent IPV is limited-especially within war-affected settings. To inform prevention programming on gender-based violence in settings affected by conflict, we evaluated the impact of adding a targeted men's intervention to a community-based prevention programme in Côte d'Ivoire. METHODS: We conducted a two-armed, non-blinded cluster randomized trial in Côte d'Ivoire among 12 pair-matched communities spanning government-controlled, UN buffer, and rebel-controlled zones. The intervention communities received a 16-week IPV prevention intervention using a men's discussion group format. All communities received community-based prevention programmes. Baseline data were collected from couples in September 2010 (pre-intervention) and follow-up in March 2012 (one year post-intervention). The primary trial outcome was women's reported experiences of physical and/or sexual IPV in the last 12 months. We also assessed men's reported intention to use physical IPV, attitudes towards sexual IPV, use of hostility and conflict management skills, and participation in gendered household tasks. An adjusted cluster-level intention to treat analysis was used to compare outcomes between intervention and control communities at follow-up. RESULTS: At follow-up, reported levels of physical and/or sexual IPV in the intervention arm had decreased compared to the control arm (ARR 0.52, 95% CI 0.18-1.51, not significant). Men participating in the intervention reported decreased intentions to use physical IPV (ARR 0.83, 95% CI 0.66-1.06) and improved attitudes toward sexual IPV (ARR 1.21, 95% CI 0.77-1.91). Significant differences were found between men in the intervention and control arms' reported ability to control their hostility and manage conflict (ARR 1.3, 95% CI 1.06-1.58), and participation in gendered household tasks (ARR 2.47, 95% CI 1.24-4.90). CONCLUSIONS: This trial points to the value of adding interventions working with men alongside community activities to reduce levels of IPV in conflict-affected settings. The intervention significantly influenced men's reported behaviours related to hostility and conflict management and gender equitable behaviours. The decreased mean level of IPV and the differences between intervention and control arms, while not statistically significant, suggest that IPV in conflict-affected areas can be reduced through concerted efforts to include men directly in violence prevention programming. A larger-scale trial is needed to replicate these findings and further understand the mechanisms of change. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT01803932.

IntroductionIntimate partner violence (IPV) violates women's human rights, and it is a serious public health concern associated with increased HIV risk. SASA!, a phased community mobilization intervention, engages communities to prevent IPV and promote gender equity. The SASA! study assessed the community‐level impact of SASA! on reported HIV‐related risk behaviours and relationship dynamics.MethodsData were collected as part of a cluster randomized controlled trial conducted between 2007 and 2012 in eight communities in Kampala. An adjusted cluster‐level intention to treat analysis, compares secondary outcomes in intervention and control communities at follow‐up. The qualitative evaluation explored participants' subjective experience of SASA!. A total of 82 in‐depth interviews were audio recorded at follow‐up, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic analysis.ResultsMen in intervention communities were significantly more likely than controls to report a broad range of HIV‐protective behaviours, including higher levels of condom use (aRR 2.03, 95% CI 1.22–3.39), HIV testing (aRR 1.50, 95% CI 1.13–2.00) and fewer concurrent partners (aRR 0.60, 95% CI 0.37–0.97). They were also more likely to report increased joint decision‐making (aRR 1.92, 95% CI 1.27–2.91), greater male participation in household tasks (aRR 1.48, 95% CI 1.09–2.01), more open communication and greater appreciation of their partner's work inside (aRR 1.31, 95% CI 1.04–1.66) and outside (aRR 1.49, 95% CI 1.08–2.06) the home. For women, all outcomes were in the hypothesized direction, but effect sizes were smaller. Only some achieved statistical significance. Women in intervention communities were significantly more likely to report being able to refuse sex with their partners (aRR 1.16, 95% CI 1.00–1.35), joint decision‐making (aRR 1.37, 95% CI 1.06–1.78) and more open communication on a number of indicators. Qualitative interviews suggest that shifts operated through broader improvements in relationships, including increased trust and cooperation, participants' greater awareness of the connections between HIV and IPV and their resultant desire to improve their relationships. Barriers to change include partial uptake of SASA!, partner resistance, fear and entrenched previous beliefs.ConclusionsSASA! impacted positively on reported HIV‐related risk behaviours and relationship dynamics at a community level, especially among men. Social change programmes focusing on IPV and gender equity could play an important role in HIV prevention efforts.