At a glance
ClinicalIndex Comparison RecordStandardized by ClinicalIndex from the ClinicalTrials.gov record · verify against the source.
Development of a Tailored HIV Prevention Intervention for Young Men
In Brief
A clinical study evaluating myDEx and NTHP for HIV Infections. Completed, enrolled 180 participants across 1 site.
Detailed Summary
This study uses an interactive design and development process to develop tailored messages that align YMSM's relationship experiences and desires with HIV prevention strategies. The study includes a tailored online prevention, intervention, as well as an attention control non--tailored HIV prevention (NTHP) comparison intervention. The pilot RCT will compare the intervention (N=120) to NTHP (N=60) to assess intervention feasibility and acceptability, and gather preliminary behavioral data to inform a subsequent application. Follow-up assessments will be collected at thirty (30), sixty (60), and ninety (90) days post-intervention.
Study Details
Timeline
Interventions
myDEx will consist of a 6-session online program. Cognizant of challenges maintaining users' attention in a web application and to facilitate delivery through a smartphone, the investigators will design each session to be no more than 20 minutes in length. In the course of these 6 sessions, participants will have a total of 120 minutes of intervention exposure. Across sessions, the investigators will emphasize the importance of sexual decision-making across different partner types, help men consider what type of relationship(s) they want, and align these relationship desires with safer sex practices.
The investigators will create a 6-session attention-control comparison to match the intervention in time and attention yet have non-tailored and non-interactive content (NTHP). NTHP will include HIV/STI information currently available on sex education websites. The attention-control condition allows the investigators to avoid confounding due to content and ensures that all participants receive some HIV prevention content given their high vulnerability to HIV. Further, this comparison will help critically examine the extent to which tailoring increases the acceptability to the program, above and beyond having a non-tailored, non-interactive intervention.