Social capital, the sum of an individual’s resource-containing social network connections, has been proposed as a facilitator of successful HIV care engagement. We explored relationships between social capital, psychological covariates (depression, stigma and internalized homonegativity), and viral suppression in a sample of young Black gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (YB-GBMSM). We recruited 81 HIV-positive YB-GBMSM 18–24 years of age from a clinic setting. Participants completed a cross-sectional survey, and HIV-1 viral load (VL) measurements were extracted from the medical record. Sixty-five percent (65%) were virally suppressed (HIV-1 VL ≤ 40 copies/ml). Forty-seven percent (47%) had a positive depression screen. Depressive symptoms affected viral suppression differently in YB-GBMSM with lower vs. higher social capital (p = 0.046, test for statistical interaction between depression and social capital). The odds of viral suppression among YB-GBMSM with lower social capital was 93% lower among those with depressive symptoms (OR= 0.07, p= 0.002); however, there was no association between depressive symptoms and viral suppression among those with higher social capital. Our results suggest that social capital may buffer the strong negative effects of depressive symptoms on clinical outcomes in YB-GBMSM living with HIV. In addition to treating depression, there is a role for interventions to augment social capital among YB-GBMSM living with HIV as a strategy for enhancing care engagement.
Although social capital
Although this topic is understudied in the US, research highlighting the role of social capital in HIV care has previously been conducted in diverse international settings. A multi-country ethnographic study in sub-Saharan Africa, for example, found social capital to be both a direct and indirect facilitator of care engagement among people living with HIV (
To date, social capital has not been specifically linked to HIV care outcomes among YB-GBMSM in the US. Inquiry into the functioning of social capital among YB-GBMSM may help to identify novel targets for innovative interventions aiming to improve HIV care engagement among YB-GBMSM. We therefore sought to explore direct and indirect effects of social capital in a clinic-recruited sample of YB-GBMSM living with HIV.
As noted above, we define social capital from the individual’s perspective as “the net worth of an individual’s resource-containing reciprocal, and trustworthy social network connections” (
A few conceptual distinctions are worth noting. Our focus on personally owned social capital (inherent in an individual’s network connections) differs from that of scholars who measure social capital and its effects at the community level (e.g., focusing on the levels of social cohesion and civic participation within communities) (
In our review of the literature on social capital and HIV care outcomes, several factors emerged as potentially important covariates that should be included in our analysis: namely, depression and stigma. Depressive symptoms have repeatedly been demonstrated to impede effective engagement in care among people living with HIV. Prior research has delineated negative relationships between depression and a range of outcomes along the HIV care continuum, including medication adherence/acceptance (
Stigma is another factor that is important for HIV care engagement and may be related to depression and social capital among YB-GBMSM and other people living with HIV. Ware et al.’s work in sub-Saharan Africa specifically cited stigma as a major barrier to care that appeared to be buffered by social capital (
The current analysis is an exploratory study that was designed to examine associations between social capital and HIV viral suppression (the ultimate measure of engagement along the HIV care continuum) among YB-GBMSM. We hypothesized that social capital would be positively associated with HIV viral load suppression, and therefore designed the study to address the following objectives: (1) To determine whether social capital (total social capital, bonding social capital and bridging social capital) had a positive direct association with HIV viral load suppression; (2) To determine whether any relationship between social capital and HIV viral load suppression was confounded by depressive symptoms, HIV stigma, and/or internalized homonegativity. (3) To determine whether social capital might indirectly impact (act as an effect modifier) between psychosocial covariates (depressive symptoms, stigma, internalized homonegativity) and HIV viral load suppression.
We recruited 81 YB-GBMSM living with HIV from a pediatric/adolescent clinic in a large Southeastern city in the United States, between November 2015 and July 2016. Potential participants were approached during their visits to medical providers or other support staff in the clinic. Patients who self-identified as Black and male, reported a history of ever having sex with a male partner, and had been in care at the clinic for at least one year, were invited to participate. This was largely a convenience sample; however, in an effort to recruit a sample that included incompletely engaged individuals, we stratified our recruitment so that half of the participants had missed more than 25% of their scheduled visits within the previous year, while the other half had not. Participants completed a one-time Audio Computer Assisted Self Interview (ACASI) that included measures of social capital, depressive symptoms, and other psychosocial constructs. A trained graduate research assistant subsequently abstracted clinical data from the patient’s electronic medical record (EMR), including scheduled and missed appointments as well as the most recent viral load measurement.
We modified Chen’s Personal Social Capital Scale (
In order to modify the scale for use among YB-GBMSM, our study team (consisting of researchers with experience working directly with YB-GBMSM in our local community) first examined each scale item and changed wording that was unlikely to be relevant for our participants or that might be difficult to understand (e.g., references to “country fellows”). We also added items that seemed likely to be important for our participants based on our prior work with YB-GBMSM (e.g., questions about lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer [LGBTQ] organizations and college fraternities). Next, we conducted individual cognitive interviews with a convenience sample of five YB-GBMSM to solicit input on the readability, clarity and content of the scale. We added items and clarified wording based on their feedback. Finally, we piloted the modified scale in an online sample of n=204 geographically diverse YB-GBMSM aged 18–29 recruited via a popular social networking website that caters specifically to Black GBMSM, and found the scale to have excellent reliability in that sample (α=0.88); the same was true in the current sample (α=0.86).
We utilized the Centers for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Revised version (CESD-R) to measure depressive symptoms (
This construct was measured using the Revised HIV Stigma scale for youth, a 10-item scale that asks participants to rate their agreement with various statements about attitudes towards people with HIV, disclosure concerns, and negative self-image (
We utilized Mayfield’s Internalized Homonegativity Inventory (IHNI) to measure this construct (
Viral suppression was defined here as HIV-1 RNA (viral load) below the limit of detection for the assay used in the clinical encounter. The most commonly used assays have lower limits of either 20 or 40 copies/mL, depending on the patient’s insurance provider (or lack thereof), which in turn determines the laboratory that ultimately performs the test. We utilized the participant’s most recent viral load measurement, which was in most cases collected on the date of the survey, and which was always within 90 days of the survey date.
The potential association of each of the factors in
Due to the limited number of patients without viral suppression and concern for model overfitting, covariates included in multivariable logistic regression analyses were limited to main effects. Covariate selection was driven by available knowledge, theoretical expectations, and biological plausibility of potential confounders, taking into consideration the hypothesis of interest. The adjusted OR and its 95% confidence interval were calculated for each risk factor in the presence of others in the final models.
Subgroup analyses were used to evaluate potential moderating effects of total, bonding and bridging social capital on the relationship between depressive symptoms and viral suppression. The effect of total social capital (and separately, bonding social capital and bridging social capital) was investigated by including the statistical interaction between depressive symptoms (CESD-R: <16 or ≥16) and social capital in a logistic regression model.
Our sample ranged in age from 18–24 years (mean=22, SD= 1.5). A large majority (84%) described their sexual orientation as gay, with few participants self-identifying as bisexual, straight/heterosexual or questioning/unsure. Most had completed at least a high school diploma or General Education Development (GED – high school equivalency) certification, and many had started college or technical school as well. Two-thirds reported current employment. In terms of their engagement in care, half of the sample had missed over 25% of their appointments, and 71.6% had missed at least one appointment. In spite of this, 56/81 (69.1%) self-reported very good or excellent adherence, and 53/81 (65.4%) were virally suppressed at the time of the survey (
The prevalence of depressive symptoms was high in our sample. Nearly half (47%) of our participants scored above the CESD-R cutoff for depressive symptoms. The mean social capital score was 25 (SD=6.4), which is comparable to results among Chinese respondents in Chen’s original scale validation study (
Participants with lower total social capital (below the median of 25) were less likely to be virally suppressed compared to participants with higher total social capital (59% vs. 73%, OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.28–1.04; p=0.06,
From multivariable logistic regression, only depressive symptoms remained associated with viral suppression (
We found evidence of effect modification by total social capital on the association between depressive symptoms and viral suppression. When comparing YB-GBMSM with lower total social capital (below the median score of 25; N=41) to YB-GBMSM with higher total social capital (above 25; N=40), the interaction was significant (
We also examined potential moderating effects of the social capital subscales (bonding and bridging capital) on the relationship between depressive symptoms and viral suppression. In these cases, the interaction was not significant; neither bonding nor bridging capital alone moderated the relationship between depressive symptoms and viral suppression (test for statistical interaction between depressive symptoms and bonding social capital, p=0.31; test for statistical interaction between depressive symptoms and bonding social capital, p=0.11; data not shown).
The prevalence of depressive symptoms in our sample was high, even compared with other studies of US youth living with HIV (
The stronger association of bonding social capital (relative to bridging social capital) with viral suppression was a notable finding. Previous research on the influence of bonding and bridging capital on health has yielded conflicting results. The importance of bonding social capital has been demonstrated for mental health in particular (
The function of social capital as a buffer against depressive symptoms is consistent with a prior US study that found social network factors (including size of emotional, financial and medical support networks) to be significantly associated with fewer depressive symptoms in a mixed-serostatus sample of Black men who have sex with men (MSM) participating in the HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 061 protocol (
In another very pertinent study, Friedman et al. utilized data from the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study (MACS) of MSM living with HIV, and found that functional social support (a single item measuring the number of people an individual could “count on”) was an effect modifier between concomitant syndemic indicators (including depression) and viral suppression (
Our study has several limitations. Our sample size was small, limiting our ability to make statistical inferences. This is in part because we initially powered our study on retention in care, and may therefore have been underpowered to detect smaller effect sizes on viral suppression. Additionally, the recruitment of patients directly from the clinic setting skewed our sample towards those who were more easily able to maintain some level of care engagement. To offset this bias, we did purposively recruit our sample so that half of our participants were less compliant youth (who had missed 25% or more of their visits in the last year). Still, all participants were at least engaged in care enough to come to a clinic visit, and future studies should aim to recruit from the community to reach a wider range of YB-GBMSM. Finally, we recruited from a single site and cannot gauge how generalizable our results may or may not be to other geographic or clinical settings – multisite investigations are indicated in the future.
Still, several strengths bear mention. In our assessment of care engagement, we were able to utilize biological measurements obtained from the EMR abstraction, as opposed to relying on participant self-report. Our analysis was culturally specific: to measure social capital, we utilized a scale that we had previously adapted and tested specifically in YB-GBMSM – this and all reported measures had excellent reliability in our sample. Finally, this analysis focused not only on barriers to care (e.g., depressive symptoms) but also began to demonstrate the role of social capital – an important, modifiable resilience factor with the potential to improve outcomes for YB-GBMSM living with HIV.
Our results suggest a potential role for interventions that augment social capital among YB-GBMSM living with HIV, particularly for those with depressive symptoms. Interventions have previously been developed to intentionally create social capital in non-U.S. settings; these include community empowerment interventions, group-based microfinance, support groups, and peer-led interventions (
This study was supported by the Center for AIDS Research at Emory University (P30AI050409) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U01 PS005112). We would like to also acknowledge our study participants for the time and effort of their thoughtful involvement in our study. We would also like to thank our excellent research assistants for their work on scale development, study recruitment and data entry: Candace Markley, Emily Grossniklaus, Berthine Njiemoun, Naomi David, and Brittani Carter.
All authors disclose no potential conflicts of interest. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee (Emory IRB and Grady Research Oversight Committee) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Baseline Characteristics (n = 81)
| Age (years) mean ± SD | 22.4 ± 1.6 |
| Sexual Orientation | |
| Gay or homosexual | 68 (84.0%) |
| Bisexual | 9 (11.1%) |
| Heterosexual/Straight | 1 (1.2%) |
| Questioning/Unsure | 3 (3.7%) |
| Education | |
| Did not complete HS | 10 (12.3%) |
| HS/GED/Post HS | 71 (87.7%) |
| Current Employment | 54 (66.7%) |
| Missed appointments | |
| Missed more than 25% appointments | 41 (50.6%) |
| At least one appointment missed | 51 (71.6%) |
| Self-reported good or excellent adherence | 56 (69.1%) |
| Virologically suppressed | 53 (65.4%) |
Unless otherwise noted, continuous variables are reported as mean ± SD and categorical variables are reported as no. (%).
Bivariable logistic regression analysis of variables potentially associated with viral suppression
| Prevalence of viral suppression | Odds ratio [95% CI] | p | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ALL patients | 53/81 (65%) | |||
| Age | <23 | 20/36 (56%) | 0.46 [0.24,0.88 ] | 0.019 |
| ≥23 | 33/45 (73%) | reference | ||
| Education | did not complete HS | 5/10 (50%) | 0.48 [0.19,1.23] | 0.13 |
| HS/GED/Post HS | 48/71 (68%) | reference | ||
| Working | Yes | 39/54 (72%) | 2.41 [1.22,4.77 ] | 0.011 |
| No | 14/27 (52%) | reference | ||
| Sexual Orientation | bisexual, heterosexual/straight, questioning/unsure | 7/13 (54%) | 0.56 [0.24,1.31 ] | 0.18 |
| homosexual/gay | 46/68 (68%) | reference | ||
| Housing | 0.0002 | |||
| Lives alone | 31/41 (76%) | reference | ||
| Living with family | 14/19 (74%) | 0.90 [0.37,2.18 ] | ||
| Other | 8/21 (38%) | 0.20 [0.09,0.44 ] | ||
| Moved in last 6 months | No | 28/36 (78%) | 2.8 [1.4,5.6 ] | 0.0036 |
| Yes | 25/45 (56%) | reference | ||
| Total Social Capital (median =25) | <25 | 24/41 (59%) | 0.54 [0.28,1.04 ] | 0.06 |
| ≥25 | 29/40 (73%) | reference | ||
| Bonding Social Capital (median 12) | <12 | 24/41 (59%) | 0.54 [0.28,1.04 ] | 0.06 |
| ≥12 | 29/40 (73%) | reference | ||
| Bridging Social Capital (median 13.5) | <13.5 | 26/40 (65%) | 0.96 [0.39,2.41 ] | 0.93 |
| ≥13.5 | 27/41 (66%) | reference | ||
| HIV Stigma (median 26) | <26 | 28/38 (74%) | 2.02 [0.79,5.17 ] | 0.14 |
| ≥26 | 25/43 (58%) | reference | ||
| Internalized Homonegativity (median 48) | <48 | 30/39 (77%) | 2.75 [1.05,7.2 ] | 0.04 |
| ≥48 | 23/42 (55%) | reference | ||
| Depressive Symptoms (CESD-R) | <16 Not Depressed | 35/43 (81%) | reference | |
| ≥ 16 Depressed | 18/38 (47%) | 0.21 [0.1,0.42 ] | <.0001 |
Multivariable logistic regression analysis of variables potentially associated with viral suppression
| Risk Factor | β | SE | OR [95% CI] | P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total social capital (median 25) | <25 vs 25 | −0.3173 | 0.5211 | 0.73 [0.26,2.02] | 0.54 |
| Depressive symptoms (<16 or ≥16) | Yes vs No | −1.3366 | 0.5567 | 0.26 [0.09,0.78 ] | 0.016 |
| HIV stigma (median 26 ) | < 26 vs 26 | −0.1526 | 0.612 | 0.80 [0.26,2.85 ] | 0.80 |
| Internalized Homonegativity (median 48) | <48 vs 48 | 0.671 | 0.581 | 1.96 [0.63,6.11] | 0.248 |
Abbreviations: β, estimated regression coefficient; SE, standard error; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.
Logistic regression model with total social capital and depressive symptoms plus the interaction as risk factors potentially associated with viral suppression
| Subgroup | Odds Ratio (95% CI) | P Value |
|---|---|---|
| Depressed: Total social capital (<25 vs ≥25) | 0.27 (0.07, 1.05) | 0.06 |
| Not Depressed: Total social capital (<25 vs ≥25) | 2.53 (0.45, 14.3) | 0.30 |
| Low social capital (depressed/not depressed) | 0.07 (0.01, 0.37) | 0.002 |
| High social capital (depressed/not depressed) | 0.63 (0.15, 2.59) | 0.52 |
P value for interaction between total social capital and depressive symptoms =