2017
DOI: 10.1080/09540121.2017.1371664
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Testing our FAITHH: HIV stigma and knowledge after a faith-based HIV stigma reduction intervention in the Rural South

Abstract: Eliminating racial/ethnic HIV disparities requires HIV-related stigma reduction. African-American churches have a history of addressing community concerns, including health issues, but may also contribute to stigma. We developed and pilot tested a faith-based, anti-stigma intervention with 12 African-American churches in rural Alabama. We measured HIV-related stigma held by 199 adults who participated in the intervention (individual-level) and their perception of stigma among other congregants (congregational-… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
24
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…More studies should include randomized controlled and quasi-experimental designs that better facilitate causal inference, mediation analyses that can statistically quantify potential mechanisms, and ethnographic methods to observe how RFS works in practice. Next, quantitative studies that investigate HIV stigma as a mechanism (e.g., mediator between RFS and some HIV prevention outcome) are needed since there is already several interventions tackling stigma [65,[84][85][86]. One recent study that evaluated an intervention "Love with no Exceptions" among clergy and church members in Alabama found very little change in HIV stigma attitudes before and after the intervention [87].…”
Section: Plos Onementioning
confidence: 99%
“…More studies should include randomized controlled and quasi-experimental designs that better facilitate causal inference, mediation analyses that can statistically quantify potential mechanisms, and ethnographic methods to observe how RFS works in practice. Next, quantitative studies that investigate HIV stigma as a mechanism (e.g., mediator between RFS and some HIV prevention outcome) are needed since there is already several interventions tackling stigma [65,[84][85][86]. One recent study that evaluated an intervention "Love with no Exceptions" among clergy and church members in Alabama found very little change in HIV stigma attitudes before and after the intervention [87].…”
Section: Plos Onementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Health ministries could facilitate linkage to medical care or HIV testing events [ 48 , 49 ]. Therefore, resources to increase compassion and church support for those infected and affected could benefit many congregations and reduce HIV-related stigma in churches [ 19 , 50 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are a number of factors facilitating readiness to address HIV, including having the blessing and support of the church leadership, purview on sexual health, and resources to implement prevention [ 11 , 12 ]. Yet a notably, well-documented social challenge remains—stigma—which disrupts people living with HIV from accessing care and serves as a threat to public health [ 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ]. One area that faith leaders and researchers continue to grapple with is how best to reconcile sexuality and HIV with biblical teachings.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We measured HIV-related stigma held by 199 adults (church members) who participated in the intervention (individual-level) and their perception of stigma among other congregants (congregational-level). Analyses of pre- and post-assessments showed the anti-stigma intervention group reported a significant reduction in individual-level stigma compared with the control group (mean difference: − 0.70 intervention vs. − 0.16 control, adjusted p < 0.05) [ 50 ]. Engaging faith leaders facilitated the successful tailoring of the intervention, and congregation members were willing participants in the research process.…”
Section: Interventions Developed By Mari Investigatorsmentioning
confidence: 99%