The Flawed Reliance on Randomized Controlled Trials in Studies of HIV Behavioral Prevention Interventions for People Who Inject Drugs and Other Populations

Samuel R. Friedman, David C. Perlman, Danielle C. Ompad

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This article discusses ways in which randomized controlled trials do not accurately measure the impact of HIV behavioral interventions. This is because: 1. Such trials measure the wrong outcomes. Behavior change may have little to do with changes in HIV incidence since behavior change in events between HIV-concordant people have no impact on incidence. Even more important, the comparison of HIV incidence rates between study arms of individual-level RCTs does not measure the true outcome of interest-whether or not the intervention reduces HIV transmission at the community level. This is because this comparison cannot measure the extent to which the intervention stops transmission by HIV-infected people in the study to those outside it. (And this is made even worse if HIV-infected are excluded from the evaluation of the intervention.) 2. There are potential harms implicit in most cognitively oriented behavioral interventions that are not measured in current practice and may not be measurable using RCTs. Intervention trials often reinforce norms and values of individual self-protection. They rarely if ever measure whether doing this reduces community trust, solidarity, cohesion, organization, or activism in ways that might facilitate HIV transmission. 3. Many interventions are not best conceived of as interventions with individuals but rather with networks, cultures of risks, or communities. As such, randomizing individuals leads to effective interventions that diffuse protection through a community; but these are evaluated as ineffective because the changes diffuse to the control arm, which leads to systematic and erroneous reductions in the evaluated effectiveness as RCTs measure it. The paper ends by discussing research designs that are superior to individual-level RCTs at measuring whether an intervention reduces or increases new HIV transmission.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1117-1124
Number of pages8
JournalSubstance Use and Misuse
Volume50
Issue number8-9
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 29 2015

Fingerprint

Randomized Controlled Trials
HIV
drug
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Population
incidence
Incidence
community
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
civil defense
arms control
group cohesion
solidarity
research planning
Research Design
Organizations
organization
event
evaluation

Keywords

  • behavioral interventions
  • effectiveness
  • HIV transmission
  • randomized controlled trials
  • RCTs
  • reducing infection
  • research design

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Health(social science)
  • Medicine (miscellaneous)

Cite this

The Flawed Reliance on Randomized Controlled Trials in Studies of HIV Behavioral Prevention Interventions for People Who Inject Drugs and Other Populations. / Friedman, Samuel R.; Perlman, David C.; Ompad, Danielle C.

In: Substance Use and Misuse, Vol. 50, No. 8-9, 29.07.2015, p. 1117-1124.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2fc4c736bc6842ce861fb3a3e06451cf,
title = "The Flawed Reliance on Randomized Controlled Trials in Studies of HIV Behavioral Prevention Interventions for People Who Inject Drugs and Other Populations",
abstract = "This article discusses ways in which randomized controlled trials do not accurately measure the impact of HIV behavioral interventions. This is because: 1. Such trials measure the wrong outcomes. Behavior change may have little to do with changes in HIV incidence since behavior change in events between HIV-concordant people have no impact on incidence. Even more important, the comparison of HIV incidence rates between study arms of individual-level RCTs does not measure the true outcome of interest-whether or not the intervention reduces HIV transmission at the community level. This is because this comparison cannot measure the extent to which the intervention stops transmission by HIV-infected people in the study to those outside it. (And this is made even worse if HIV-infected are excluded from the evaluation of the intervention.) 2. There are potential harms implicit in most cognitively oriented behavioral interventions that are not measured in current practice and may not be measurable using RCTs. Intervention trials often reinforce norms and values of individual self-protection. They rarely if ever measure whether doing this reduces community trust, solidarity, cohesion, organization, or activism in ways that might facilitate HIV transmission. 3. Many interventions are not best conceived of as interventions with individuals but rather with networks, cultures of risks, or communities. As such, randomizing individuals leads to effective interventions that diffuse protection through a community; but these are evaluated as ineffective because the changes diffuse to the control arm, which leads to systematic and erroneous reductions in the evaluated effectiveness as RCTs measure it. The paper ends by discussing research designs that are superior to individual-level RCTs at measuring whether an intervention reduces or increases new HIV transmission.",
keywords = "behavioral interventions, effectiveness, HIV transmission, randomized controlled trials, RCTs, reducing infection, research design",
author = "Friedman, {Samuel R.} and Perlman, {David C.} and Ompad, {Danielle C.}",
year = "2015",
month = "7",
day = "29",
doi = "10.3109/10826084.2015.1007677",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "50",
pages = "1117--1124",
journal = "Substance Use and Misuse",
issn = "1082-6084",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",
number = "8-9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Flawed Reliance on Randomized Controlled Trials in Studies of HIV Behavioral Prevention Interventions for People Who Inject Drugs and Other Populations

AU - Friedman, Samuel R.

AU - Perlman, David C.

AU - Ompad, Danielle C.

PY - 2015/7/29

Y1 - 2015/7/29

N2 - This article discusses ways in which randomized controlled trials do not accurately measure the impact of HIV behavioral interventions. This is because: 1. Such trials measure the wrong outcomes. Behavior change may have little to do with changes in HIV incidence since behavior change in events between HIV-concordant people have no impact on incidence. Even more important, the comparison of HIV incidence rates between study arms of individual-level RCTs does not measure the true outcome of interest-whether or not the intervention reduces HIV transmission at the community level. This is because this comparison cannot measure the extent to which the intervention stops transmission by HIV-infected people in the study to those outside it. (And this is made even worse if HIV-infected are excluded from the evaluation of the intervention.) 2. There are potential harms implicit in most cognitively oriented behavioral interventions that are not measured in current practice and may not be measurable using RCTs. Intervention trials often reinforce norms and values of individual self-protection. They rarely if ever measure whether doing this reduces community trust, solidarity, cohesion, organization, or activism in ways that might facilitate HIV transmission. 3. Many interventions are not best conceived of as interventions with individuals but rather with networks, cultures of risks, or communities. As such, randomizing individuals leads to effective interventions that diffuse protection through a community; but these are evaluated as ineffective because the changes diffuse to the control arm, which leads to systematic and erroneous reductions in the evaluated effectiveness as RCTs measure it. The paper ends by discussing research designs that are superior to individual-level RCTs at measuring whether an intervention reduces or increases new HIV transmission.

AB - This article discusses ways in which randomized controlled trials do not accurately measure the impact of HIV behavioral interventions. This is because: 1. Such trials measure the wrong outcomes. Behavior change may have little to do with changes in HIV incidence since behavior change in events between HIV-concordant people have no impact on incidence. Even more important, the comparison of HIV incidence rates between study arms of individual-level RCTs does not measure the true outcome of interest-whether or not the intervention reduces HIV transmission at the community level. This is because this comparison cannot measure the extent to which the intervention stops transmission by HIV-infected people in the study to those outside it. (And this is made even worse if HIV-infected are excluded from the evaluation of the intervention.) 2. There are potential harms implicit in most cognitively oriented behavioral interventions that are not measured in current practice and may not be measurable using RCTs. Intervention trials often reinforce norms and values of individual self-protection. They rarely if ever measure whether doing this reduces community trust, solidarity, cohesion, organization, or activism in ways that might facilitate HIV transmission. 3. Many interventions are not best conceived of as interventions with individuals but rather with networks, cultures of risks, or communities. As such, randomizing individuals leads to effective interventions that diffuse protection through a community; but these are evaluated as ineffective because the changes diffuse to the control arm, which leads to systematic and erroneous reductions in the evaluated effectiveness as RCTs measure it. The paper ends by discussing research designs that are superior to individual-level RCTs at measuring whether an intervention reduces or increases new HIV transmission.

KW - behavioral interventions

KW - effectiveness

KW - HIV transmission

KW - randomized controlled trials

KW - RCTs

KW - reducing infection

KW - research design

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84941413025&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84941413025&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3109/10826084.2015.1007677

DO - 10.3109/10826084.2015.1007677

M3 - Article

C2 - 26222900

AN - SCOPUS:84941413025

VL - 50

SP - 1117

EP - 1124

JO - Substance Use and Misuse

JF - Substance Use and Misuse

SN - 1082-6084

IS - 8-9

ER -