Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > The impact of community mobilisation on HIV pre...

Electronic data

  • art%3A10.1007%2Fs10461-014-0748-5

    Rights statement: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited. Copyright. The Author(s) 2014. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com

    Final published version, 392 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

The impact of community mobilisation on HIV prevention in middle and low income countries: a systematic review and critique

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Published
  • Flora Cornish
  • Jacqueline Priego-Hernandez
  • Catherine Campbell
  • Gitau Mburu
  • Susie McLean
Close
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>11/2014
<mark>Journal</mark>AIDS and Behavior
Issue number11
Volume18
Number of pages25
Pages (from-to)2110-2134
Publication StatusPublished
Early online date23/03/14
<mark>Original language</mark>English

Abstract

While community mobilisation (CM) is increasingly advocated for HIV prevention, its impact on measurable outcomes has not been established. We performed a systematic review of the impact of CM within HIV prevention interventions (N = 20), on biomedical, behavioural and social outcomes. Among most at risk groups (particularly sex workers), the evidence is somewhat consistent, indicating a tendency for positive impact, with stronger results for behavioural and social outcomes than for biomedical ones. Among youth and general communities, the evidence remains inconclusive. Success appears to be enhanced by engaging groups with a strong collective identity and by simultaneously addressing the socio-political context. We suggest that the inconclusiveness of the findings reflects problems with the evidence, rather than indicating that CM is ineffective. We discuss weaknesses in the operationalization of CM, neglect of social context, and incompatibility between context-specific CM processes and the aspiration of review methodologies to provide simple, context-transcending answers.

Bibliographic note

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited. Copyright. The Author(s) 2014. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com