Examining Migration, Social Bonds, Transnationalism, and HIV Prevention Pathways Among African Immigrants.

African immigrants in the United States account for a disproportionate share of new HIV diagnoses relative to their population size, yet this community remains underrepresented in HIV prevention research. Existing prevention strategies rarely address the relational and structural contexts that shape prevention engagement in this population. Relationships, including intimate partnerships, family systems, and co-ethnic social networks, function as key mechanisms through which HIV risk perception, disclosure, and prevention decisions are negotiated. Migration reorganizes these relational structures by altering trust dynamics, communication norms, household decision-making authority, and transnational obligations in ways that are not well understood. The proposed study addresses this gap by generating foundational, mechanism-focused evidence on how migration-shaped relational contexts influence engagement with HIV testing, HIV self-testing, and PrEP among African immigrants in the United States.

The study is guided by a relational-socioecological framework that positions relationships as central mechanisms linking individual, interpersonal, and structural determinants of HIV prevention behavior. Within this framework, migration is not treated as a direct risk factor but as a structural force that reshapes the relational contexts through which prevention decisions occur. Processes such as separation, reunification, and transnational living alter intimacy, trust, and communication, while cross-border financial obligations and dense co-ethnic networks reinforce norms of discretion and respectability that may suppress prevention engagement. This framework builds on prior qualitative and community-engaged research by the principal investigator, including PCORI-supported African immigrant-led agenda-setting work that identified relationships, trust, and communication as central yet under-addressed drivers of HIV prevention in this community.

The study uses a three-phase sequential design in which each phase builds directly on the findings of the prior one. AIM 1, where relationship typologies and relational mechanisms must first be empirically identified before intervention components can be meaningfully co-developed, and community deliberation must occur in AIM 2. The final step in AIM 3 will be a proof-of-concept assessment that can be conducted with a typology-matched sample.

This sequencing ensures that the intervention component tested in Aim 3 is grounded in both empirical evidence and community priorities rather than researcher-imposed assumptions.

Palava Hut Conversations (PHC) is an African-centered deliberative method adapted from traditional West African communal dialogue practices. It structures collective reasoning through facilitated discussion, negotiated agreement, and consensus-building. PHC was selected for Aim 2 because it centers community knowledge and cultural authority in the co-development process, moves beyond nominal input to genuine co-creation, and generates actionable, community-validated outputs through structured prioritization. This approach ensures that intervention components reflect the lived experiences, cultural values, and practical constraints of the target population.

Aim 1 qualitative data will undergo thematic analysis to identify relationship typologies and relational mechanisms. Survey data will be analyzed descriptively to contextualize typology distribution and prevention awareness across the sample.

Aim 2 deliberation outputs, including facilitator notes, decision logs, and prioritization matrices, will be synthesized using rapid qualitative methods to produce a ranked list of intervention components.

Aim 3 pre- and post-exposure survey data will be summarized using descriptive statistics to assess the direction and consistency of change across prevention intention outcomes. Cognitive interview data will undergo rapid thematic analysis focused on implementation-relevant constructs including acceptability, feasibility, perceived fit, usability, and evidence of mechanism activation.

• Change in Mean Score of HIV Testing Intention [Time frame: Pre-intervention (T0) and immediately post-intervention (T1), within the same session]
• Change in HIV Self-Testing Willingness [Time frame: Pre-intervention (T0) and immediately post-intervention (T1), within the same session]
• Change in Communication Readiness [Time frame: Pre-intervention (T0) and immediately post-intervention (T1), within the same session]
• Change in PrEP Awareness and Interest [Time frame: Baseline (T0) and immediately post-intervention (T1), within the same session]