ArticleBMJ public health2026
Cost-benefit analysis of adolescent HIV/STI prevention and comprehensive sexuality education interventions in Cambodia: a modelling study.
Article in BMJ public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Among youth in Cambodia, there is low awareness of HIV and sexually transmitted infection (STI) risk, and the prevalence of unintended pregnancies is high. We aimed to quantify the health and economic benefits of reaching the 2025 Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) target of 95% coverage of combination HIV prevention/testing packages for young key population groups as well as providing comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) for all youth. Methods: The model considered 10-19-year olds in Cambodia, disaggregated by key population group (young men who have sex with men, young transgender persons, young people who use drugs, young female entertainment workers) and in-school/out-of-school status. Three scenarios were projected over 2023-2030: (1) a baseline scenario with fixed intervention coverage; (2) a scenario scaling up existing HIV/STI prevention and testing interventions for young key populations through multiple delivery modalities, plus in-school CSE, over 2024-2025 to reach 95% coverage (maintained until 2030); and (3) scenario 2 plus an additional out-of-school CSE programme for all being implemented and scaled to 95% coverage. HIV infections, unintended pregnancies, maternal deaths and stillbirths averted were converted to economic benefits. Results: Scenario 2 costs US$10.6 million more than the baseline scenario over 2023-2030, and averted 1184 HIV infections, 10 172 unintended pregnancies, 16 maternal deaths and 106 stillbirths. This investment could generate US$36.1 million in economic benefits by 2050, with a benefit-cost ratio of 3.4. Scenario 3, including out-of-school CSE, achieved additional health benefits; however, it was less cost-effective than in-school CSE. Conclusion: Investment in HIV prevention/testing packages for young key population groups and CSE programmes can have favourable returns in Cambodia. Strategies to maintain high levels of school enrolment can facilitate cost-effective ways to expand CSE coverage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.