book icon

HIV Prevention Knowledge Base

A Collection of Research and Tools to Help You Find What Works in Prevention

Behavioral Interventions: HIV Prevention for Hard-to-Reach Men Who Have Sex with Men

I. Definition of the Prevention Area

The ability to find and target men who have sex with men (MSM) for HIV prevention research and services can depend on the visibility of various subgroups of MSM. Those who are most visible generally don’t conform to traditional standards of “masculinity” and may appear “feminine” or gender neutral. Or they may be outwardly indistinguishable from men who have sex with women only, but they remain easier to target because they identify themselves as “gay” and may frequent gay establishments.

MSM may identify themselves as gay, bisexual, “straight,” or transgendered. Up to 20 percent of MSM perceive themselves as “straight.” Such heterosexually identified or “straight” MSM are generally highly secretive about their sexual activities and often appear quite “masculine.”

II. Epidemiological Justification for the Prevention Area

MSM who self-identify as heterosexual may escape the notice or reach of researchers and programmers who seek to study and/or to provide services for MSM.

MSM are a priority for HIV prevention in all parts of the world. Globally, MSM are at significantly greater risk for HIV infection than other adults of reproductive age. Factors contributing to this risk include biological, behavioral, and structural factors, such as unprotected anal intercourse, multiple sex partners, and the social marginalization and discrimination that MSM often endure.

MSM are vulnerable regardless of national HIV prevalence levels. In medium-to-high prevalence areas, such as parts of Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, MSM are on average more than nine times more vulnerable to infection than the general population.

MSM can transmit HIV to women; this may be especially true for straight-identified MSM who, according to some studies, are more likely to be married than straight men who have sex only with women.

Surveys seldom include questions about MSM, and researchers are often discouraged from seeking data on this population due to its marginalized status. Consequently, available data likely underestimate the prevalence of MSM in a given country. The bulk of research on HIV prevention for MSM is largely derived from studies conducted in industrialized countries, where same-sex sexual behavior is typically not criminalized and where sexual minorities have often organized to protect their interests.

In developing countries, the small but growing body of research on MSM has focused mostly on men who associate their same-sex behavior with a gay identity; this focus tends to exclude MSM who are not readily identifiable or who identify as “straight.” According to a UNAIDS estimate in 2006, fewer than 5 percent of MSM around the world who need HIV services have access to them.

III. Core Programmatic Components

Research is sometimes integrated with service or intervention programs for MSM. For example, researchers conducting surveys sometimes include services for participants, such as counseling, testing, and prevention services; condom distribution; diagnosis and treatment for sexual transmitted infections; and peer education.

IV. Current Status of Implementation Experience

Although many studies demonstrate the reproducibility of research and the effectiveness of behavioral interventions for MSM in the United States, far less information is available for program outcomes in certain geographic areas, such as Africa and Asia, or among hard-to-reach subgroups of MSM.

Because of difficulties identifying or locating certain MSM subgroups, researchers and program developers may rely on long-chain or respondent-driven sampling (RDS) in order to reach MSM. Respondent-driven sampling and/or outreach relies on study participants to recruit their acquaintances to a study, who in turn recruit their acquaintances.

An obvious benefit of RDS is that MSM who are openly identified as gay can reach MSM who hide their identities and who don’t frequent gay establishments. However, some drawbacks with RDS have emerged. For example, individuals who are selected to initiate a long chain may become identified with the researchers or sponsoring organization, thus compromising their effectiveness as peers. Cronyism has been apparent in some instances. Additionally, peer-participants may misunderstand the goals of research or the offered services and expect or demand financial support.

Some programs in low-income nations have been highly successful. One particularly successful project was a media education and sensitization conference held in Senegal, which attracted media from 20 print, radio, and television media outlets. Researchers conducted a review of news articles on MSM during the 18-month period following the two-day media conference and found no “offensive or stigmatizing” articles published about MSM.

Successful programs should include behavioral surveillance plans and enhanced social science research that reflects the diversity of the sexual behavior of MSM and the varied social and political contexts affecting them. Legal protections for sexual minorities and efforts to reduce the stigma and discrimination they often face are central to the effort to ensure full access to programs for MSM.

Текст на русском языке (Russian Translation)