Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Original article
Pilot programme using social network interviews to screen high-risk adolescents and young adults
  1. Michiyo Yamazaki1,
  2. Jamie Rogers2,
  3. Shang-En Chung1,
  4. Jonathan Ellen1
  1. 1The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
  2. 2The Johns Hopkins Harriet Lane/Intensive Primary Care Clinic, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Michiyo Yamazaki, 5200 Eastern Ave. Suite 4200, Baltimore, MD 21224, USA; myamaza1{at}


Objective To describe a pilot programme that consisted of identifying, contacting and providing HIV testing to members of social and sexual networks of HIV-infected youth patients as a part of routine clinical care at an adolescent HIV clinic in Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Methods Forty-nine sexually active HIV-infected adolescent patients were interviewed about their social and sexual contacts at a routine HIV clinic visit. A trained community health worker located these referred social and sexual contacts, and encouraged them to make an appointment for HIV counselling, testing and referral (CTR) services.

Results During a period of 18 months, 26 index youths provided locating information on 53 first-generation contacts and these 53 contacts provided information on 16 second-generation contacts. A total of 32 contacts received counselling services and 25 were tested for HIV infection, yielding three new HIV-positive individuals.

Conclusion As a part of standard care for regular visits of HIV-infected youth patients, interviewing about their social and sexual contacts could be a viable strategy in identifying high-risk youths for HIV infection and subsequent CTR services.

  • Adolescent
  • HIV testing
  • intervention studies
  • referral
  • STD clinic

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.