Appendix A

Summary of studies using the Health Belief Model as the theoretical framework for evaluating HIV/AIDS sexual risk.

Authors Yr Sample Design Test Sus Sev Thr Cues Ben Bar SE SS Beh
Lollis, Johnson, 97 58M/64F- E/Sur/NR/C HLR +(M) X X X +(W) +(W) NS X Con/#P
& Antoni College
Brunswick & 96 364 African E/I/Sur/R/C SEM -(MW) NS NS X X X NS X HRSI
Banaszak-Holl Amer -
Community
Steers, Elliot, 96 424 College E/Sur/NR/C MR + NS X X X - + + Con/#P
Nemiro, Ditman,
& OsKamp
Wilson, Lavell, 91 448M/204F- E/Sur/NR/C MR +(W) U U + -(M) U + U Con/#P
Greenspan, & College
Wilson (Zimbabwe)
Abraham, 92 154M/194F – E/Sur/R/C MR X NS X +(M) +(W) NS X X Icon/#P
Sheeran, Spears, Adolescents
& Abrams (Scotland)
Edem & Harvey1 95 221M/171F- E/Sur/NR/C MR NS NS X NS + - X X Icon
College
(Nigeria) LR NS NS X + + - X X Con Use
Y/N
Simon, Morse, 93 211M E/Sur/I/NR/C MR + NS X X + - X X Rsk Sca
Balson, Osofsky, Prostitutes
& Gaumer
Walter, Vaughan, 92 531 10th E/Sur/NR/C LR X X X X X X + + Index
Gladis, Ragin, graders
Kasen, & Cohall

(continued on next page)

 Appendix A (continued)

Summary of studies using the Health Belief Model as the theoretical framework for evaluating HIV/AIDS sexual risk.

Authors Yr Sample Design Test Sus Sev Thr Cues Ben Bar SE SS Beh
Zimmerman & 94 441 M/F E/Sur/NR/C MR NS NS NS NS NS NS X X Index
Olson College
MR NS NS NS NS NS + X X Index
Neff & Crawford 98 1390 E/Sur/NR/C SEM + NS X X +(W) + X X Index
Community
Ford & Norris 95 590 M – E/I/R/C LR - X X X X X X X Con Use
Community
Gielen, Faden, 94 573 F – E/I/NR/C LR + + X NS NS + X X Con Use
O’Campo, Kass, Community
& Anderson LR + NS X + NS NS X X #P
Rosenthal, Hall, 92 195 – College E/Sur/NR/C MR + NS X NS NS NS X Z Scale
& Moore (Australia)
Bakker, Buunk, 97 83 Gay and E/Sur/NR/C MR NS X X + + NS X X Con Use
Siero, & van den Bisexual Intention
Eijnden Males (Young)

MR + X X NS NS NS X X Con Use
Intention
(Older)
Lux & Petosa 95 452 Juvenile D/Sur/NR/C Percentages reported – condom use and social barriers inversely related to condom use
Delinquents
(13-18 yrs)
Petosa & 90 679 7th/ 9th/ D/Sur/NR/C Percentages only reported in this study – no outcome was assessed.
Wessinger 11th graders

(continued on next page)

 Appendix A
Summary of studies using the Health Belief Model as the theoretical framework for evaluating HIV/AIDS sexual risk.

Authors Yr Sample Design Test Sus Sev Thr Cues Ben Bar SE SS Beh
Aspinwall, 91 389 Gay Men E/Sur/NR/L HLR + X X X X X X - #P
Kemeny, Taylor, (HIV+ men,
Schnieider, & no primary
Dudley partner)
Montgomery, 89 495 Gay and E/Sur/NR/L LR - + X X NS NS X X to lower
Joseph, Becker, Bisexual risk
Ostrow, Kessler, Males
& Kirscht
Carmel, Green, 92 385MF Army E/Sur/NR/C MR NS NS X NS + X X X Con Use
Slepon, Tsur, & Recruits
Vardi (Israel) MR -(W) +(W) X + +(M) X X X #P
Notes:
1 Some studies have multiple rows of information. This represents different analyses within the same study.
Table Index for symbols used in columns
Sample: M=Male F=Female

Design: D=Descriptive E=Explanatory P=Predictive Sur=Survey I=Interview R=Random

NR=Non-random C=Cross-sectional L=Longitudinal

Statistic: MR=Multiple regression HLR=Heirarchical linear regression LR=Logistic regression SEM=Structural equation modeling

Predictor Labels: Sus=Perceived susceptibility Sev=Perceived severity Thr=Perceived threat Cues=Cues to Action
Ben=Perceived Benefits Bar=Perceived Barriers SE=Self-efficacy for prevention SS=Social support

Predictor categories: +=positive relationship with outcome -=negative relationship with outcome NS=non-significant relationship
X=not assessed U=unsure from study whether variable was assessed or not ( ) indicates the gender for which
the relationship is valid
Behavior DV: Con=condom use I=intention #P=number of partners RskSca=risk scale used Index=risk index used
HRS=High risk sex =change in
 Appendix B
Summary of studies using the Transtheoretical Model of behavior change as the framework for evaluating HIV/AIDS sexual risk.

Authors Yr Sample Design Test Proc Pro Con SE CF TP BEH

Bowen & Trotter 95 265 Drug E/Sur/NR/C LR X + NS X X X HRS/I
Users
Montoya 97 61F Drug E/Sur/NR/C LR X X X + X X SOC
Users
2
Harlow, Prochaska, 94 209M/136F- D/Sur/NR/C GK- / Descriptive study on viability of staging on condom use
Redding, Rossi, College
Velicer, & Snow
Grimley, Prochaska, & 93 248-College D/E/Sur/NR/C ANOVA Compared assertiveness for condom use by stage
Prochaska
Evers, Harlow, 98 491W – E/Sur/NR/L LTA Longitudinal prediction of stage movement. Verified stability of stages
Redding, & Laforge College and
Community
Galavotti, Cabral, 95 296W- D/Sur/NR/C SEM/CFA Development and validity of condom use efficacy scales
Lansky, Grimley, Riley, Community
& Prochaska
Grimley, Prochaska, 96 296- D/Sur/NR/C SEM/CFA Development of self-efficacy scales
Prochaska, Velicer, Community/
Galavotti, Cabral, et. al. 246-College

(continued on next page)

 Appendix B (continued)
Summary of studies using the Transtheoretical Model of behavior change as the framework for evaluating HIV/AIDS sexual risk.

Authors Yr Sample Design Test Proc Pro Con SE CF TP BEH

Bowen & Trotter 95 265 Drug E/Sur/NR/C LR X + NS X X X HRS/I
Users

Table Index for symbols used in columns

Sample: M=Male F=Female

Design: D=Descriptive E=Explanatory P=Predictive Sur=Survey I=Interview R=Random

NR=Non-random C=Cross-sectional L=Longitudinal

Statistic: MR=Multiple regression HLR=Heirarchical linear regression LR=Logistic regression SEM=Structural equation modeling
LTA=Latent Transition Analysis GK- =Goodman and Kruskal’s Gamma (test of association)
2
=chi square test of independence

Measures: Pro=Condom Use Pros Con=Condom Use Cons SE=self-efficacy CF=confidence TP=temptations
STG=stage BEH=behavior outome (assessed DV)

Predictor results : +=positive relationship w/ outcome -=negative relationship w/ outcome NS=non-significant relationship w/
outcome X=not assessed U=unsure of assessment ( ) indicates the gender for which the relationship is valid
 Appendix C
Summary of studies using the AIDS Risk Reduction Model as the framework for evaluating HIV/AIDS sexual risk.
Labeling Commitment Enactment
Authors Yr Sample Design Test KN PS SN RE EJ SE KNC SNC IS RM ES
Longshore, 97 128-Drug User E/Sur/NR/C PA + + + + X + X X X X *
Anglin, & Hsieh
Malow & Ireland 96 111-Drug User E/I/Sur/NR/C MR NS + X NS NS - X X X X #P
Catania, Coates, & 94 716- E/Sur/NR/C LR X NS NS X + NS X X + X Con
Kegeles Community
Dolcini, Coates, 95 962- E/I/R/L LR NS + X X X X X X X X MP
Catania, Kegeles, Community
& Hauck
Kowalewski, 94 161-Drug User E/Sur/NR/C PA NS NS + NS NS + X X X X Con vs
Longshore, & No Con
Anglin
Kline & 94 214F/HIV+ E/Sur/NR/C LR X - X X + X X X X X Con
VanLandingham
Malow, Corrigan, 93 136-African E/Sur/NR/C HRA X X X X X + X X X X Con vs
Cunningham, American No Con
West, & Pena Drug User
Burkholder, 99 481-College E/Sur/NR/C SEM - + X X X - X X X X Con/#P
Harlow, &
Washkwich
Morrison-Beedy 97 208F- E/Sur/NR/C MR + DV X X X X X X X X X
Community
Bertrand, Brown, 92 5454 F- D/I/Sur/R/C Freq 25-29 yrs age group, more educated, married felt most at risk for HIV/AIDS
Kinzonzi, Community
Mansilu, &
Djunghu

(continued on next page)

 Appendix C (continued)

Summary of studies using the AIDS Risk Reduction Model as the framework for evaluating HIV/AIDS sexual risk.
Labeling Commitment Enactment
Authors Yr Sample Design Test KN PS SN RE EJ SE KNC SNC IS RM ES
Bowen & Trotter 95 265-Drug User E/Sur/NR/C LR X NS X X X X X X X X I

Table Index for symbols used in columns

Sample: M=Male F=Female

Design: D=Descriptive E=Explanatory P=Predictive Sur=Survey I=Interview R=Random NR=Non-random

C=Cross-sectional L=Longitudinal

Statistic: MR=Multiple regression HLR=Heirarchical linear regression LR=Logistic regression SEM=Structural equation modeling
2
lTA=Latent Transition Analysis GK- =Goodman and Kruskal’s Gamma (test of association) =chi square test of independence
PA=Path Analysis

Predictors: KN=AIDS Knowledge PS=Perceived severity SN=Social norms RE=Response efficacy EJ=Enjoyment
SE=Self-efficacy KNC=knowledge (commitment stage specific) SNC=Social norms (commitment stage specific)
IS=Information seeking RM=Obtaining remedies ES=Enacting solutions

Predictor categories: +=positive relationship with outcome -=negative relationship with outcome NS=non-significant relationship
with outcome X=not assessed U=unsure from study whether variable was assessed or not ( ) indicates the gender for which
the relationship is valid

Behavior DV: Con=condom use I=intention #P=number of partners RskSca=risk scale used Index=risk index used
HRS=High risk sex SaSx=Safer Sex MP=Having multiple partners d=change in