Advertisement

Current HIV/AIDS Reports

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 48–56 | Cite as

Social Networks of Substance-Using Populations: Key Issues and Promising New Approaches for HIV

  • Brooke S. WestEmail author
Behavioral Bio-Medical Interface (JL Brown and RJ DiClemente, Section Editors)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Behavioral-Bio-Medical Interface

Abstract

Purpose of Review

This paper presents recent literature on substance using networks and HIV, highlighting renewed and emerging themes in the field. The goal is to draw attention to research that holds considerable promise for advancing our understanding of the role of networks in shaping behaviors, while also providing critical information for the development of interventions, programs, and policies to reduce HIV and other drug-related harms.

Recent Findings

Recent research advances our understanding of networks and HIV, including among understudied populations, and provides new insight into how risk environments shape the networks and health of substance-using populations. In particular, the integration of network approaches with molecular epidemiology, research on space and place, and intervention methods provides exciting new avenues of investigation.

Summary

Continued advances in network research are critical to supporting the health and rights of substance-using populations and ensuring the development of high-impact HIV programs and policies.

Keywords

Substance use Social networks HIV Molecular epidemiology Place Intervention 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to Julianna Lopez for her exceptional assistance with the literature search for this paper. Dr. West was supported by funding from NIH/NIDA (K01DA041233) and by a GloCal Fellowship (R25TW009343) funded by the Fogarty International Center, NIMH, the Office of Research on Women’s Health, as well as the University of California Global Health Institute.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Degenhardt L, Peacock A, Colledge S, Leung J, Grebely J, Vickerman P, et al. Global prevalence of injecting drug use and sociodemographic characteristics and prevalence of HIV, HBV, and HCV in people who inject drugs: a multistage systematic review. Lancet Glob Health. 2017;5(12):e1192–e207.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. World Drug Report 2017. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime; 2017.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Paraskevis D. Investigation of human immunodeficiency virus outbreaks among people who inject drugs: timely diagnosis and molecular surveillance are crucial. J Infect Dis. 2017;216(9):1049–50.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    DeHovitz J, Uuskula A, El-Bassel N. The HIV epidemic in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep. 2014;11(2):168–76.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berkman L, Glass T, Brissette L, Seeman T. From social integration to health: Durkheim in the new millennium. Soc Sci Med. 2000;51:843–57.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pescosolido BA. Of pride and prejudice: the role of sociology and social networks in integrating the health sciences. J Health Soc Behav. 2006;47(3):189–208.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Friedman S, Curtis R, Neaigus A, Jose B, Des Jarlais D. Social networks, drug injectors’ lives, and HIV/AIDS. New York: Springer; 1999.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Friedman S, Neaigus A, Jose B, Curtis R, Goldstein M, Ildefonso G, et al. Sociometric risk networks and risk for HIV infection. Am J Public Health. 1997;87(8):1289–96.  https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.87.8.1289.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Latkin C, Mandell W, Vlahov D, Oziemkowska M, Celentano D. People and places: behavioral settings and personal network characteristics as correlates of needle sharing. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 1996;13(3):273–80.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Neaigus A, Friedman SR, Curtis R, Des Jarlais DC, Furst RT, Jose B, et al. The relevance of drug injectors’ social and risk networks for understanding and preventing HIV infection. Soc Sci Med. 1994;38(1):67–78.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Suh T, Mandell W, Latkin C, Kim J. Social network characteristics and injecting HIV-risk behaviors among street injection drug users. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1997;47(2):137–43.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Weeks MR, Clair S, Borgatti S, Radda K, Schensul JJ. Social networks of drug users in high risk sites: finding the connections. AIDS Behav. 2002;6(2):193–206.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Curtis R, Friedman S, Neaigus A, Jose B, Goldstein M, Ildefonso G. Street-level drug markets: network structure and HIV risk. Soc Networks. 1995;17(3):229–49.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rothenberg RB, Potterat JJ, Woodhouse DE, Muth SQ, Darrow WW, Klovdahl AS. Social network dynamics and HIV transmission. AIDS. 1998;12(12):1529–36.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Costenbader EC, Astone NM, Latkin C. The dynamics of injection drug users, personal networks and HIV risk behaviors. Addiction. 2006;101(7):1003–13.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hunter GM, Donoghoe MC, Stimson GV, Rhodes T, Chalmers CP. Changes in the injecting risk behaviour of injecting drug users in London, 1990–1993. AIDS. 1995;9(5):493.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Power R, Hunter G, Jones S, Donoghoe M. The sharing of injecting paraphernalia among illicit drug users. AIDS (London, England). 1994;8(10):1509.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Valente TW, Vlahov D. Selective risk taking among needle exchange participants: implications for supplemental interventions. Am J Public Health. 2001;91(3):406.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kirst MJ. Social capital and beyond: a qualitative analysis of social contextual and structural influences on drug-use related health behaviors. J Drug Issues. 2009;39(3):653–76.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Metsch LR, McCoy CB, McCoy HV, Shultz J, Inciardi J, Wolfe H, et al. Social influences: living arrangements of drug using women at risk for HIV infection. Women Health. 1998;27(1–2):123–36.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cepeda JA, Solomon SS, Srikrishnan AK, McFall AM, Kumar MS, Vasudevan CK, et al. Injection drug network characteristics are important markers of HIV risk behavior and lack of viral suppression. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2017;75(3):257–64.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Young A, Jonas A, Mullins U, Halgin DS, Havens J. Network structure and the risk for HIV transmission among rural drug users. AIDS Behav. 2013;17(7):2341–51.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gyarmathy VA, Caplinskiene I, Caplinskas S, Latkin CA. Social network structure and HIV infection among injecting drug users in Lithuania: gatekeepers as bridges of infection. AIDS Behav. 2014;18(3):505–10.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Coronado-García M, Thrash CR, Welch-Lazoritz M, Gauthier R, Reyes JC, Khan B, et al. Using network sampling and recruitment data to understand social structures related to community health in a population of people who inject drugs in rural Puerto Rico. P R Health Sci J. 2017;36(2):77.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rudolph AE, Crawford ND, Latkin C, Lewis CF. Multiplex relationships and HIV: implications for network-based interventions. AIDS Behav. 2017;21(4):1219–27.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Li J, Luo J, Liu H. Disassortative mixing patterns of drug-using and sex networks on HIV risk behaviour among young drug users in Yunnan, China. Public Health. 2015;129(9):1237–43.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fujimoto K, Wang P, Ross MW, Williams ML. Venue-mediated weak ties in multiplex HIV transmission risk networks among drug-using male sex workers and associates. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(6):1128–35.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Go VF, Latkin C, Le Minh N, Frangakis C, Ha TV, Sripaipan T, et al. Variations in the role of social support on disclosure among newly diagnosed HIV-infected people who inject drugs in Vietnam. AIDS Behav. 2016;20(1):155–64.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kumar PC, McNeely J, Latkin CA. ‘It’s not what you know but who you know’: role of social capital in predicting risky injection drug use behavior in a sample of people who inject drugs in Baltimore City. J Subst Abus. 2016;21(6):620–6.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Latkin CA, Smith MK, Ha TV, Mo TT, Zelaya C, Sripaipan T, et al. Roles and functions of social networks among men who use drugs in ART initiation in Vietnam. AIDS Behav. 2016;20(11):2782–9.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jonas AB, Young AM, Oser CB, Leukefeld CG, Havens JR. OxyContin® as currency: OxyContin® use and increased social capital among rural Appalachian drug users. Soc Sci Med. 2012;74(10):1602–9.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rudolph AE, Linton S, Dyer TP, Latkin C. Individual, network, and neighborhood correlates of exchange sex among female non-injection drug users in Baltimore, MD (2005–2007). AIDS Behav. 2013;17(2):598–611.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Heimer R, Barbour R, Palacios WR, Nichols LG, Grau LE. Associations between injection risk and community disadvantage among suburban injection drug users in southwestern Connecticut, USA. AIDS Behav. 2014;18(3):452–63.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Young AM, Rudolph AE, Quillen D, Havens JR. Spatial, temporal and relational patterns in respondent-driven sampling: evidence from a social network study of rural drug users. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2014;68(8):792–8.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Boodram B, Hotton AL, Shekhtman L, Gutfraind A, Dahari H. High-risk geographic mobility patterns among young urban and suburban persons who inject drugs and their injection network members. J Urban Health. 2018;95(1):71–82.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Boodram B, Mackesy-Amiti M-E, Latkin C. The role of social networks and geography on risky injection behaviors of young persons who inject drugs. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2015;154:229–35.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Campbell EM, Jia H, Shankar A, Hanson D, Luo W, Masciotra S, et al. Detailed transmission network analysis of a large opiate-driven outbreak of HIV infection in the United States. J Infect Dis. 2017;216(9):1053–62.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Conrad C, Bradley HM, Broz D, Buddha S, Chapman EL, Galang RR, et al. Community outbreak of HIV infection linked to injection drug use of Oxymorphone—Indiana, 2015. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015;64(16):443–4.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Peters PJ, Pontones P, Hoover KW, Patel MR, Galang RR, Shields J, et al. HIV infection linked to injection use of oxymorphone in Indiana, 2014–2015. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(3):229–39.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Tsang MA, Schneider JA, Sypsa V, Schumm P, Nikolopoulos GK, Paraskevis D, et al. Network characteristics of people who inject drugs within a new HIV epidemic following austerity in Athens, Greece. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr (1999). 2015;69(4):499.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hatzakis A, Sypsa V, Paraskevis D, Nikolopoulos G, Tsiara C, Micha K, et al. Design and baseline findings of a large-scale rapid response to an HIV outbreak in people who inject drugs in Athens, Greece ARISTOTLE programme. Addiction. 2015;110(9):1453–67.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Paraskevis D, Paraschiv S, Sypsa V, Nikolopoulos G, Tsiara C, Magiorkinis G, et al. Enhanced HIV-1 surveillance using molecular epidemiology to study and monitor HIV-1 outbreaks among intravenous drug users (IDUs) in Athens and Bucharest. Infect Genet Evol. 2015;35:109–21.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Paraskevis D, Νikolopoulos GK, Sypsa V, Psichogiou M, Pantavou K, Kostaki E, et al. Molecular investigation of HIV-1 cross-group transmissions during an outbreak among people who inject drugs (2011–2014) in Athens, Greece. Infect Genet Evol. 2018;62:11–16.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Dombrowski K, Khan B, Habecker P, Hagan H, Friedman SR, Saad M. The interaction of risk network structures and virus natural history in the non-spreading of HIV among people who inject drugs in the early stages of the epidemic. AIDS Behav. 2017;21(4):1004–15.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Friedman SR, Kottiri BJ, Neaigus A, Curtis R, Vermund SH, Des Jarlais DC. Network-related mechanisms may help explain long-term HIV-1 seroprevalence levels that remain high but do not approach population-group saturation. Am J Epidemiol. 2000;152(10):913–22.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Skaathun B, Khanna AS, Morgan E, Friedman SR, Schneider JA. Network viral load: a critical metric for HIV elimination. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2018;77(2):167–74.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Rhodes T. The ‘risk environment’: a framework for understanding and reducing drug-related harm. Int J Drug Policy. 2002;13(2):85–94.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Rhodes T. Risk environments and drug harms: a social science for harm reduction approach. Int J Drug Policy. 2009;20(3):193–201.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Momplaisir F, Hussein M, Tobin-Fiore D, Smith L, Bennett D, Latkin C, et al. Racial inequities in HIV prevalence and composition of risk networks among people who inject drugs in HIV prevention trial network 037. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2017;76(4):394–401.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Crawford ND, Borrell LN, Galea S, Ford C, Latkin C, Fuller CM. The influence of neighborhood characteristics on the relationship between discrimination and increased drug-using social ties among illicit drug users. J Community Health. 2013;38(2):328–37.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Crawford ND, Ford C, Rudolph A, Kim B, Lewis CM. Drug use discrimination predicts formation of high-risk social networks: examining social pathways of discrimination. AIDS Behav. 2017;21(9):2659–69.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Crawford ND, Galea S, Ford CL, Latkin C, Link BG, Fuller C. The relationship between discrimination and high-risk social ties by race/ethnicity: examining social pathways of HIV risk. J Urban Health. 2014;91(1):151–61.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Barman-Adhikari A, Rice E, Winetrobe H, Petering R. Social network correlates of methamphetamine, heroin, and cocaine use in a sociometric network of homeless youth. J Soc Soc Work Res. 2015;6(3):433–57.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Tucker JA, Cheong J, Chandler SD, Crawford SM, Simpson CA. Social networks and substance use among at-risk emerging adults living in disadvantaged urban areas in the southern United States: a cross-sectional naturalistic study. Addiction. 2015;110(9):1524–32.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Delva W, Leventhal GE, Helleringer S. Connecting the dots: network data and models in HIV epidemiology. AIDS. 2016;30(13):2009–20.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Vasylyeva TI, Friedman SR, Paraskevis D, Magiorkinis G. Integrating molecular epidemiology and social network analysis to study infectious diseases: towards a socio-molecular era for public health. Infect Genet Evol. 2016;46:248–55.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Grabowski MK, Redd AD. Molecular tools for studying HIV transmission in sexual networks. Curr Opin HIV AIDS. 2014;9(2):126–33.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Wertheim JO, Pond SLK, Forgione LA, Mehta SR, Murrell B, Shah S, et al. Social and genetic networks of hiv-1 transmission in New York city. PLoS Pathog. 2017;13(1):e1006000.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hassan AS, Pybus OG, Sanders EJ, Albert J, Esbjörnsson J. Defining HIV-1 transmission clusters based on sequence data. AIDS (London, England). 2017;31(9):1211.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Vasylyeva TI, Liulchuk M, Friedman SR, Sazonova I, Faria NR, Katzourakis A, et al. Molecular epidemiology reveals the role of war in the spread of HIV in Ukraine. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2018:115(5):1051–56.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Ragonnet-Cronin M, Jackson C, Bradley-Stewart A, Aitken C, McAuley A, Palmateer N, et al. Recent and rapid transmission of hiv among people who inject drugs in scotland revealed through phylogenetic analysis. J Infect Dis. 2018;217(2):1875–82.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Mehta SR, Wertheim JO, Brouwer KC, Wagner KD, Chaillon A, Strathdee S, et al. HIV transmission networks in the San Diego–Tijuana border region. EBioMedicine. 2015;2(10):1456–63.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Smith DM, May S, Tweeten S, Drumright L, Pacold ME, Pond SLK, et al. A public health model for the molecular surveillance of HIV transmission in San Diego, California. AIDS (London, England). 2009;23(2):225.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Brenner B, Wainberg MA, Roger M. Phylogenetic inferences on HIV-1 transmission: implications for the design of prevention and treatment interventions. AIDS. 2013;27(7):1045–57.  https://doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0b013e32835cffd9.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Dennis AM, Hue S, Hurt CB, Napravnik S, Sebastian J, Pillay D, et al. Phylogenetic insights into regional HIV transmission. AIDS. 2012;26(14):1813–22.  https://doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0b013e3283573244.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Dennis AM, Murillo W, de Maria Hernandez F, Guardado ME, Nieto AI. Lorenzana de Rivera I et al. social network-based recruitment successfully reveals HIV-1 transmission networks among high-risk individuals in El Salvador. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2013;63(1):135–41.  https://doi.org/10.1097/QAI.0b013e318288b246.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Wagner KD, Pollini RA, Patterson TL, Lozada R, Ojeda VD, Brouwer KC, et al. Cross-border drug injection relationships among injection drug users in Tijuana, Mexico. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011;113(2):236–41.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Hunter K, Park JN, Allen ST, Chaulk P, Frost T, Weir BW, et al. Safe and unsafe spaces: non-fatal overdose, arrest, and receptive syringe sharing among people who inject drugs in public and semi-public spaces in Baltimore City. Int J Drug Policy. 2018;57:25–31.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Ickowicz S, Wood E, Dong H, Nguyen P, Small W, Kerr T, et al. Association between public injecting and drug-related harm among HIV-positive people who use injection drugs in a Canadian setting: a longitudinal analysis. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2017;180:33–8.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Latkin C, Mandell W, Vlahov D, Oziemkowska M, Knowlton A, Celentano D. My place, your place, and no place: behavior settings as a risk factor for HIV-related injection practices of drug users in Baltimore, Maryland. Am J Community Psychol. 1994;22(3):415–30.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Small W, Rhodes T, Wood E, Kerr T. Public injection settings in Vancouver: physical environment, social context and risk. Int J Drug Policy. 2007;18(1):27–36.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Hembree C, Galea S, Ahern J, Tracy M, Piper TM, Miller J, et al. The urban built environment and overdose mortality in New York city neighborhoods. Health Place. 2005;11(2):147–56.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Beletsky L, Cochrane J, Sawyer AL, Serio-Chapman C, Smelyanskaya M, Han J, et al. Police encounters among needle exchange clients in Baltimore: drug law enforcement as a structural determinant of health. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(9):1872–9.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Chami G, Werb D, Feng C, DeBeck K, Kerr T, Wood E. Neighborhood of residence and risk of initiation into injection drug use among street-involved youth in a Canadian setting. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2013;132(3):486–90.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Duff P, Shoveller J, Dobrer S, Ogilvie G, Montaner J, Chettiar J, et al. The relationship between social, policy and physical venue features and social cohesion on condom use for pregnancy prevention among sex workers: a safer indoor work environment scale. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2015;69(7):666–72.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Linton SL, Cooper HL, Luo R, Karnes C, Renneker K, Haley DF, et al. People and places: relocating to neighborhoods with better economic and social conditions is associated with less risky drug/alcohol network characteristics among African American adults in Atlanta, GA. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2016;160:30–41.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Linton SL, Haley DF, Hunter-Jones J, Ross Z, Cooper HL. Social causation and neighborhood selection underlie associations of neighborhood factors with illicit drug-using social networks and illicit drug use among adults relocated from public housing. Soc Sci Med. 2017;185:81–90.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Logan JJ, Jolly AM, Blanford JI. The sociospatial network: risk and the role of place in the transmission of infectious diseases. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0146915.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Ghani A, Donnelly C, Garnett G. Sampling biases and missing data in explorations of sexual partner networks for the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. Stat Med. 1998;17(18):2079–97.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Boily M-C, Poulin R, Mâsse B. Some methodological issues in the study of sexual networks: from model to data to model. Sex Transm Dis. 2000;27(10):558–71.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Frost SD. Using sexual affiliation networks to describe the sexual structure of a population. Sex Transm Infect. 2007;83(suppl 1):i37–42.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Schneider JA. Sociostructural 2-mode network analysis: critical connections for HIV transmission elimination. Sex Transm Dis. 2013;40(6):459–61.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Fujimoto K, Williams ML, Ross MW. Venue-based affiliation networks and HIV risk-taking behavior among male sex workers. Sex Transm Dis. 2013;40(6):453–8.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Schneider JA, Walsh T, Cornwell B, Ostrow D, Michaels S, Laumann EO. HIV health center affiliation networks of black men who have sex with men: disentangling fragmented patterns of HIV prevention service utilization. Sex Transm Dis. 2012;39(8):598–604.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Wylie JL, Shah L, Jolly A. Incorporating geographic settings into a social network analysis of injection drug use and bloodborne pathogen prevalence. Health Place. 2007;13(3):617–28.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2006.09.002.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    West BS, Gonzalez-Zuniga PE, Fowler JH, Strathdee S, Brouwer KC, editors. Shooting gallery networks and risk: women’s injection venue affiliation networks in Tijuana, Mexico. College on Problems of Drug Dependence 80th Scientific Meeting; 2018 June 10, 2018; San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Aral SO, Foxman B. Spatial mixing and bridging: risk factors for what? Sex Transm Dis. 2003;30(10):750–1.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Rhodes T, Wagner K, Strathdee SA, Shannon K, Davidson P, Bourgois P. Structural violence and structural vulnerability within the risk environment: theoretical and methodological perspectives for a social epidemiology of HIV risk among injection drug users and sex workers. In: O'Campo P, Dunn J, eds. Rethinking Social Epidemiology. Dordrecht: Springer; 2012. pp.205–30.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Weeks MR, Convey M, Dickson-Gomez J, Li JH, Radda K, Martinez M, et al. Changing drug users’ risk environments: peer health advocates as multi-level community change agents. Am J Community Psychol. 2009;43(3–4):330–44.Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Ghosh D, Krishnan A, Gibson B, Brown S-E, Latkin CA, Altice FL. Social network strategies to address HIV prevention and treatment continuum of care among at-risk and HIV-infected substance users: a systematic scoping review. AIDS Behav. 2017;21(4):1183–207.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Valente TW, Palinkas LA, Czaja S, Chu K-H, Brown CH. Social network analysis for program implementation. PLoS One. 2015;10(6):e0131712.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Valente TW. Network interventions. Science. 2012;337(6090):49–53.Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Booth RE, Davis JM, Dvoryak S, Brewster JT, Lisovska O, Strathdee SA, et al. HIV incidence among people who inject drugs (PWIDs) in Ukraine: results from a clustered randomised trial. Lancet HIV. 2016;3(10):e482–e9.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Newland J, Newman C, Treloar C. “We get by with a little help from our friends”: small-scale informal and large-scale formal peer distribution networks of sterile injecting equipment in Australia. Int J Drug Policy. 2016;34:65–71.Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Smyrnov P, Broadhead RS, Datsenko O, Matiyash O. Rejuvenating harm reduction projects for injection drug users: Ukraine’s nationwide introduction of peer-driven interventions. Int J Drug Policy. 2012;23(2):141–7.Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Nikolopoulos GK, Pavlitina E, Muth SQ, Schneider J, Psichogiou M, Williams LD, et al. A network intervention that locates and intervenes with recently HIV-infected persons: the Transmission Reduction Intervention Project (TRIP). Sci Rep. 2016;6:38100.Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Vasylyeva T, Friedman S, Smyrnov P, Bondarenko K. A new approach to prevent HIV transmission: Project Protect intervention for recently infected individuals. AIDS Care. 2015;27(2):223–8.Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Tobin KE, Kuramoto SJ, Davey-Rothwell MA, Latkin CA. The STEP into action study: a peer-based, personal risk network-focused HIV prevention intervention with injection drug users in Baltimore, Maryland. Addiction. 2011;106(2):366–75.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Chami GF, Ahnert SE, Kabatereine NB, Tukahebwa EM. Social network fragmentation and community health. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2017;114(36):E7245–31.Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Valente TW. Putting the network in network interventions. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2017;114(36):9500–1.Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Latkin CA, Knowlton AR. Social network assessments and interventions for health behavior change: a critical review. Behav Med. 2015;41(3):90–7.Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Schairer C, Mehta SR, Vinterbo SA, Hoenigl M, Kalichman M, Little S. Perceptions of molecular epidemiology studies of HIV among stakeholders. J Public Health Res. 2017;6(3):992.Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Beletsky L, Arredondo J, Werb D, Vera A, Abramovitz D, Amon JJ, et al. Utilization of Google enterprise tools to georeference survey data among hard-to-reach groups: strategic application in international settings. Int J Health Geogr. 2016;15(1):24.Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Latkin CA, Davey-Rothwell MA, Knowlton AR, Alexander KA, Williams CT, Boodram B. Social network approaches to recruitment, HIV prevention, medical care, and medication adherence. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr (1999). 2013;63(01):S54.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Social WorkColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Division of Infectious Diseases and Global Public Health in the School of MedicineUniversity of California San DiegoSan DiegoUSA

Personalised recommendations