International Journal of

Environmental Research
and Public Health

Review
Systematic Review of Peer-Reviewed Literature on
Global Condom Promotion Programs
William D. Evans 1, * , Alec Ulasevich 2 , Megan Hatheway 1 and Bidia Deperthes 3
1 Milken Institute School of Public Health and The George Washington University,
Washington, DC 20052, USA; [email protected]
2 Independent Consultant, Silver Spring, MD 20902, USA; [email protected]
3 United Nations Family Planning Agency, New York, NY 10017, USA; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]




Received: 18 February 2020; Accepted: 25 March 2020; Published: 27 March 2020


Abstract: Background: Globally, 1.7 million people were newly infected with HIV in 2018. Condoms
are inexpensive, cost-effective, reduce HIV/STI incidence, morbidity, mortality, and unintended
pregnancies, and result in health care cost savings. Given the rapid increase in at-risk adolescent and
young adult (AYA) populations in countries with high HIV/STI prevalence as well as the reductions in
donor support, promoting consistent condom use remains crucial. We synthesized all peer-reviewed
literature on condom promotion programs with a focus on promotion in low and lower middle income
(LMIC) countries and with AYA users. Methods: We systematically reviewed the published literature.
Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methods,
we identified 99 articles published between 2000–2019. Results: Condom promotion programs were
generally effective in changing attitudes, social norms, and beliefs in favor of condom use, and 85%
demonstrated positive effects on multiple condom use measures. Programs targeting AYA were at
least equally as effective as those targeting others and often showed greater use of best practices,
such as mass media (66%) and audience segmentation (31%). We also saw differences between
programs in the intervention strategies they used and found greater effects of marketing strategies on
AYA compared to the overall sample. Conclusion: Condoms remain essential to prevention, and donor
support must be maintained to combat the HIV/STI epidemic.

Keywords: HIV/STI; condoms; promotion; communication; social marketing

1. Introduction
Despite gains made in the prevention of HIV and the scaling up of treatment programs, incidence
is still alarmingly high in some settings. The recent Evidence for Contraceptive Options and HIV
Outcomes (ECHO) study, for example, found an incidence rate of 3.8% among young women in select
study sites [1]. Globally, an estimated 1.7 million people were newly infected in 2018, with an unmet
need for contraception of some 214 million individuals and 357 million cases of curable sexually
transmitted infections (STIs) [2]. While data (up to 2016) show slow but steady progress toward higher
levels of condom use among non-marital, non-cohabitating men and sex workers, countries fall short
of global targets (some by a substantial amount), inequities remain, and condom use in younger
populations shows signs of stagnation or decline in at least a few key countries [3]. Donor funding for
condom programs is also a concern; global investments in HIV prevention have declined 44% since
2012 [4]. Intensified efforts are urgently needed to increase condom use, especially in high HIV/STI
prevalence countries.
Condoms are inexpensive and cost-effective. They reduce HIV and STI incidence, morbidity,
mortality, and unintended pregnancies and result in cost savings for healthcare and social sectors.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262; doi:10.3390/ijerph17072262 www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 2 of 21

Condoms are highly effective in preventing sexual transmission of HIV. Consistent and correct use of
the male condom significantly reduces HIV transmission during vaginal sex (80%) [5] and anal sex
(70–90%) [6,7]. Female condoms can provide similar levels of protection for vaginal sex and anal sex
(although less data are available on their use during anal sex), making them among the most effective
prevention technologies available today [8].
Condoms are also a familiar and convenient prevention method to most people and are, for many,
still the only viable option to prevent HIV, STIs, and unintended pregnancies. Condoms are a
user-initiated method, are easy to use and store, do not require medical prescriptions or direct provision
by health-care personnel or in facilities, and can be used by anyone who is sexually active—including
youth. Condom programming is one of five core UNAIDS Prevention Pillars [9] and should be an
integrated component of all HIV prevention and care packages, offering individuals at risk with an
important and effective choice to prevent HIV, STIs, and unintended pregnancies.
The current study has two overarching aims: (1) to analyze the literature in order to demonstrate
which condom promotion programs have been shown to be effective and their characteristics; (2) to
provide an overall description of published condom programs worldwide. We address these aims in
the context of the current environment for condom demand creation and donor-sponsored programs.
Strong condom programming requires investment at the systems level in program stewardship,
which will support improvements in demand and supply, leading to improved program outcomes.
Mann Global Health, in close collaboration with the United Nations Family Planning Agency (UNFPA),
UNAIDS, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), has developed a theory of change for
this systems level approach, as shown in Figure 1 [10].

Figure 1. The Condom Program Pathway, a theory of change.

Program stewardship is a critical function for every nationally-owned condom program to

develop and implement strategies to increase use sustainably. The components of program
stewardship—leadership and coordination that stretch across all sectors engaged in condom
programming (public, non-profit organizations (NGO), and commercial); production and dissemination
of program analytics to inform intervention design and monitor progress; financing to support needed
interventions; and a supportive policy and regulatory environment—are all prerequisites for success.
In particular, investments in strengthening leadership and coordination and program analytics are
urgently needed in many countries. These investments at the systems level will improve quantification
of need and understanding of existing use and create a strong evidence base to understand supply and
demand dynamics that influence uptake and use [11]. National condom programs also require efforts
to develop a supportive environment, including improved coordination and advocacy in support of a
total market approach (TMA) that engages all sectors and enabling policy and regulatory environments
that support diversified markets to ensure condom access is sustained. Additionally, the role of
pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and the possibility that it is associated with reduced condom use,
potentially leading to increased STI rates, needs to be explored as part of comprehensive condom
promotion policies [12].
Given the landscape of current condom programming, there is a need to understand the state
of evidence for condoms as an HIV/STI prevention strategy and an effective contraceptive method,
especially for young people, as well as gaps in the knowledge base and the potential for future
programs and research to move the field forward. In particular, the use of a total market approach
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 3 of 21

(TMA) (i.e., creating a healthy market in which consumers who are able to pay purchase condoms,
and efficient distribution ensures the poor have access to free product) is critical to the future of condom
marketing [13,14].
The need for effective application of TMA is even greater given the rapid growth in the population
of adolescents and young adults (AYA) in regions most affected by HIV/STI, including sub-Saharan
Africa (SSA). AYA populations in SSA are estimated to increase to some 250 million under age 25 by
2030, and, given their potential sexual risk taking behavior, the HIV/STI epidemic remains a public
health priority calling for comprehensive and innovative solutions [15].
Thus, there is a need to document and systematically review the state of evidence on condom
programs with a specific focus on effectiveness of interventions to promote condom use through
communication and social marketing, which have been the primary demand creation strategies used
to date. The current research provides evidence and a framework for future programing to support
TMA programs.
Overall goals of this study are to systematically review all published literature on outcomes of
condom distribution programs worldwide. One important part of this project is to understand the
demand generation strategies in low and lower middle income (LMIC) countries and to understand
the AYA generation of condom users in order to develop effective demand promotion strategies.
We hypothesize (H1) that demand generation efforts have been effective in increasing determinants of
condom use, and (H2) that demand generation has been effective in increasing sales and distribution
of condoms. We also ask the research question (RQ1) of whether these efforts have been more effective
among specific population groups, in specific geographic locations or settings, and based on specific
media channels and strategies.
In particular, we ask whether these efforts have been more effective among AYA ages 15–34
during the period in the which the project/study was conducted. Given the rapid growth of the AYA
population in regions such as SSA, understanding how best to promote condoms to this priority
population is critical to future prevention efforts.

2. Methods
We conducted a systematic search of the published, peer-reviewed literature using all relevant
major online research literature databases (specified below) and following widely accepted methods
for systematic review (Higgins and Green, 2011) [16]. We note that social marketing and interventions
focused on condoms are also widely represented in unpublished reports and other “gray” literature.
However, in this study, we focused on peer-reviewed literature in order to ensure quality of evidence
and consistency with accepted systematic review practices.
We identified as relevant any manuscripts published in the English language in health, social
science, and business literature that used at least one of the four Ps of marketing, had a behavioral
objective targeting promotion of condom sales, use, and related behaviors, and had a health objective
targeting HIV/STI or related disease prevention. We based the review methodology in part on
methodologies from a previous review of branded social marketing campaigns conducted by the lead
author [17]. Specifically, we searched the following health, social science, and business databases:
PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science (includes Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences
Citation Index, and Arts and Humanities Citation Index), Communication & Mass Media Complete,
Academic Search Premier, Business Source Premier, CINAHL, Health Source: Nursing/Academic
Edition, and Health Source: Consumer Edition.
We selected search terms based on the authors’ experiences in the field and conducting previous
reviews and in consultation with a medical research librarian. We applied the following criteria to
conduct the search: (1) limited to only include articles published from 2000 onward; (2) search terms
included condoms + marketing, brands, branding, health promotion, free distribution, commercial,
subsidized; (3) went beyond other recent reviews (e.g., Evans et al., 2015) to include distribution
programs for commercial brands (to extent any published results) [17]; coding included population
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 4 of 21

targeted, marketing methods, research/evaluation methods, outcomes (including differential effects

on audiences), type of condom (male/female), country/region, urban/peri-urban/rural, and age range
target (adolescents, young adults, older).
For completeness, we also searched literature known to the authors, including publications on
condom promotion, social marketing, and related intervention studies in low and middle income
countries. In particular, the bibliographies of two recent meta-analyses on social marketing and mass
media intervention were reviewed, and potential citations were screened following the methods
described [18–20].
We searched all sources listed above in the date range of January 2000 to December 2019. Based on
this process, we created a database of all 4240 unduplicated articles on social marketing interventions
regarding condoms. Based on abstract review, we immediately excluded 3988 articles that did not
relate to condom promotion or marketing, were clearly not original research, or were only focused on
other family planning methods, leaving 252.
Next, we obtained and reviewed the 252 full-text articles based on our specific criteria for inclusion
in study. Namely, we screened them for reports on interventions that: (1) were original research
(not review papers, meta-analyses, or commentaries); (2) utilized some form of social marketing
principles (i.e., reported on use of one or more of the four Ps); (3) targeted behavior relating to
condom use; and (4) targeted HIV/STI prevention and/or related reproductive health outcomes as
a health objective. We also screened to ensure the articles included specific reports of evaluation or
implementation of social marketing activities, defined as coordinated efforts to promote, distribute,
or use pricing strategies to encourage adoption of various products aimed primarily at HIV/STI
prevention. Based on this in-depth screening process, we excluded 153 articles and identified 99 articles
for inclusion in the study. Figure 2 summarizes the review process based on Preferred Reporting Items
for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology [21]. In this review, we followed
the complete 27-item PRISMA checklist previously published [21].
Note that, due to the diverse nature of the literature on demand creation and marketing
interventions in this area and the varying methods of reporting outcomes, we chose not to attempt a
meta-analysis of effects of reviewed interventions on behavior. Rather, the purpose of this paper is to
describe the nature of the interventions and literature, hopefully promoting more uniform reporting of
condom promotion outcomes in the future.
Once the review sample of articles was identified, the first two authors individually read each of
the articles in-depth and coded them for specific content reported in the results section. The results of all
reviews were compiled and discussed by the reviewers. Potential sources of differences in assumptions
and approaches in coding articles were identified and discussed. A consensus was reached about
coding, and common procedures were adopted where discrepancies were identified.

3. Results
Table 1 provides a summary of basic information gleaned from each condom promotion article
reviewed. The articles dealt with interventions relating to social marketing and promotion of condom
brands, HIV/STI prevention programs based on increasing condom use, and family planning programs
that promoted condoms. The majority of studies (81%) were focused only on male condoms, but 19%
included female condoms in some fashion.
Fifty-five percent (55%) of studies were published before 2010. The majority of studies were
conducted in low and middle income countries, mostly in South Asia and Sub Saharan Africa (54),
with some reported in wealthy countries, mainly the USA (27). Finally, the largest single age range
targeted was AYA age 15–34 (35%), followed by women (31%). Eleven percent of studies specifically
targeted LGBTQ populations.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 5 of 21

Figure 2. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) diagram of
systematic review process.

Table 1. Characteristics of the publications reviewed.

Overall AYA Population Other Populations

Product Promoted N Percent N Percent N Percent
Male Condom 80 81% 30 86% 50 78%
Female Condom 9 9% 2 6% 7 11%
Both 10 10% 3 9% 7 11%
Year of Publication N Percent N Percent N Percent
2000 to 2009 45 45% 20 57% 25 39%
2010 to 2019 54 55% 15 43% 39 61%
Region N Percent N Percent N Percent
Sub-Sahara African 38 38% 10 29% 28 44%
US/Canada 27 27% 14 40% 13 20%
India 8 8% 0 0% 8 13%
Latin America 7 7% 2 6% 5 8%
Western Europe 5 5% 3 9% 2 3%
South East Asia 5 5% 3 9% 2 3%
East Asia 4 4% 1 3% 3 5%
India sub-continent 2 2% 0 0% 2 3%
Oceania 4 4% 4 11% 0 0%
Central Asia 1 1% 0 0% 1 2%
Middle East and North Africa 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Eastern/Southern Europe 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 6 of 21

For each characteristic listed in the left-hand column, Table 1 shows the total for the overall sample
(all publications reviewed), the subset for each category in the AYA population, and the subset for
other populations, defined as those that did not specifically target AYA (i.e., either explicitly targeted
those age 35 and older or reported no specific age targeting).
A higher percentage of articles in the 2000s reported targeting the AYA population (57%) compared
to the overall population (45%), and the reverse was true in the 2010s (55% overall compared to 43%
targeting AYA). Thirty-eight percent of efforts in Sub-Saharan African targeted the overall sample
compared to 29% that targeted AYAs. However, 40% of efforts in the US/Canada targeted AYAs
compared to 27% for this region in the overall sample.
As shown in Table 2, the interventions used a wide range of health communication and social
marketing strategies, including mass media, interpersonal communication (IPC) through community
outreach, and visits to households by health workers. High levels of awareness of the promoted health
messages were reported. Among these, slightly more than half of studies reviewed (52%) reported
use of mass media channels, with community outreach being the second most commonly reported
technique (44%). Techniques to reach specific audiences were reported with segmentation being
most common (21%), but in some cases, articles did not provide sufficient information to code for
these categories.

Table 2. Marketing approaches.

Marketing Channels Overall AYA Population Other Populations

N Percent N Percent N Percent
Reported channels of dissemination 74 75% 25 71% 49 77%
Reported mass media channels 51 52% 23 66% 28 44%
Mass media channels mentioned
TV 19 19% 9 26% 10 16%
Radio 33 33% 14 40% 19 30%
Print 22 22% 11 31% 11 17%
Outdoor 32 32% 13 37% 19 30%
Digital 7 7% 3 9% 4 6%
Point of Sale/Location 16 16% 9 26% 7 11%
Other 1 1% 0 0% 1 2%
Other dissemination channels
Earned Media 2 2% 1 3% 1 2%
Community Outreach 44 44% 16 46% 28 44%
Community Mobilization 15 15% 6 17% 9 14%
Health Care Providers 25 25% 8 23% 17 27%
Mobile 2 2% 1 3% 1 2%
Social Media 4 4% 1 3% 3 5%
Other 4 4% 2 6% 2 3%
Other Marketing Techniques
Audience Segmentation 21 21% 11 31% 10 16%
Message Tailoring 10 10% 6 17% 4 6%
Educational Entertainment 9 9% 5 14% 4 6%
Other 7 7% 3 9% 4 6%
AYA: adolescent and young adult.

There were some differences observed between AYA-targeted marketing and overall. Sixty-six
percent of AYA marketing used mass media compared to 52% of the overall sample. The largest
difference in mass media channel reported was 26% for AYA point of sale/location marketing efforts
compared to 16% in the overall sample for that category. Among other marketing techniques reported,
31% of AYA efforts used audience segmentation (considered widely to be best marketing practice [22])
compared to 21% of the overall sample.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 7 of 21

Table 3 provides a summary of the social marketing development described in the condom
promotion articles reviewed. Forty-two percent (42%) of the studies described specific scientific
theories used in the development of the social marketing effort used. Psychological theories were the
most commonly used theories, found in 29% of the studies reviewed, followed by marketing theory
with 19%. One third of the articles (33%) described intervention efforts based in formative research
such as interviews and focus groups.

Table 3. Marketing development.

Overall Youth and Young Adults Other Populations

Coding Category
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Scientific Theory Mentioned 42 42% 22 63% 20 31%
Type of Theory Mentioned
Psychological 29 29% 16 46% 13 20%
Communication 5 5% 3 9% 2 3%
Marketing 19 19% 7 20% 12 19%
Other 1 1% 0 0% 1 2%
Formative Research Mentioned 33 33% 18 51% 15 23%
Type of Formative Research Mentioned
Focus Groups 13 13% 8 23% 5 8%
Individual Interviews 7 7% 3 9% 4 6%
Quantitative Research 7 7% 3 9% 4 6%
Other 4 4% 4 11% 0 0%
Marketing P’s
Product 66 67% 22 63% 44 69%
Price 49 49% 19 54% 30 47%
Place 74 75% 26 74% 48 75%
Promotion 82 83% 26 74% 56 88%

Higher percentages of efforts targeting AYA used theory, with 63% reporting some kind of
theoretical framework, driven mainly by greater use of psychological theory (46% for AYA efforts
compared to 29% for the overall sample). Fifty-one percent of AYA efforts reported formative research
in the marketing effort compared to 33% in the overall sample, with higher percentages reported for
the AYA efforts in each category of formative research methods.
Examination of the studies in terms of the use of the four Ps of marketing (place, price, product,
and promotion) revealed that 45% used all four marketing techniques [22]. Promotion was the most
commonly used technique reported by 83% of the articles, as represented by the channels shown in
Table 2. The interventions that addressed place included any efforts to expand availability of condoms,
such as community based sales, distribution of condoms by community health workers and health
workers, as well as assuring availability of condoms in non-conventional venues such as hotels and
places of entertainment. Three quarters of the studies reviewed (75%) mentioned such efforts to expand
availability of condoms. Product interventions employed by 67% of the articles represented a wide
range of techniques, from introducing new product such as female condom, introducing flavored
condoms, improving existing products and packaging, to re-positioning condoms as birth control
rather than STI prevention methods in some markets. Interventions focusing on price were reported by
just under half (49%) of the studies. These included efforts to both reduce the actual cost of condoms
through subsidies as well as to decrease the psychological price of using condoms with regular partners.
Table 4 provides a summary of the study design and outcomes in the condom promotion articles
reviewed. Most of the articles reviewed described studies with an observational design; the remaining
studies were equally split between experimental and quasi-experimental designs. Almost all articles
reported on the study sample size and sample characteristics. Multivariate analysis was used to
report statistics in over half of the studies. More than half of the studies (57%) aimed to assess
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 8 of 21

condom use behavioral objectives (i.e., the effort aimed to achieve such as outcome), including condom
use at last sex, consistent condom use, and condom use with specific types of partners, and clearly
stated these outcomes. A similar number of articles (56%) made clear statements about the assessing
pre-behavioral objectives (i.e., the effort aimed to achieve such as outcome), including attitudes, social
norms and beliefs about condom use, its benefits, acceptability, and personal preferences related to use.
Correspondingly, 67% of the articles reported actually achieving some type of condom use behavioral
outcome and 68% of the articles reported achieving some type of pre-behavioral outcome, as defined.

Table 4. Study design and outcomes.

Overall AYA Population Other Populations

Coding Category
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Described Sample 81 82% 28 80% 53 83%
Describe Sample Size 76 77% 25 71% 51 80%
Describe Sample Characteristics 69 70% 23 66% 46 72%
Reported Response Rate 18 18% 7 20% 11 17%
Research Design
Not Reported 4 4% 2 6% 2 3%
Experimental 23 23% 10 29% 13 20%
Quasi-Experimental 16 16% 5 14% 11 17%
Observational 56 57% 18 51% 38 59%
Statistics Reported
Not Reported 6 6% 4 11% 2 3%
Descriptive 35 35% 12 34% 23 36%
Multivariate 57 58% 19 54% 38 59%
Path Analysis 1 1% 0 0% 1 2%
Stated Objectives
Product/Awareness or Reaction 42 42% 21 60% 21 33%
Condom Use Pre-Behavioral Objectives 55 56% 24 69% 31 48%
Condom Use Behavioral Objectives 56 57% 23 66% 33 52%
Sales/Distribution 13 13% 1 3% 12 19%
Outcomes Reported
Product/Awareness or Reaction 52 53% 18 51% 34 53%
Condom Use Pre-Behavioral Outcomes 67 68% 28 80% 39 61%
Condom Use Behavioral Outcomes 66 67% 25 71% 41 64%
Sales/Distribution 24 24% 5 14% 19 30%

There were only small differences in the observed reporting of sample characteristics, research
design type, and statistics between the overall and the AYA targeted efforts. However, higher
percentages of AYA targeted efforts reported pre-behavioral and behavioral objectives (69% and 66%,
respectively) compared to the overall sample (56% and 57% respectively). Thirteen percent of the
overall sample reported targeting sales/distribution objectives compared to only 3% of AYA efforts.
Similarly, higher percentages of AYA efforts reported achieving condom use behavior outcomes (80%
and 71%, respectively) compared to the overall sample (68% and 67%, respectively), and again more of
the overall sample targeted sales distribution (24%) than AYA efforts (14%).
Table 5 summarizes the significant findings reported by the articles reviewed, both overall and by
the marketing approaches used. Overall, a higher percentage of the overall sample reported significant
effects on condom awareness or positive reactions to promotions and sales/distribution (37% and
23%, respectively) compared to efforts targeting AYA (26% and 14%, respectively). However, a higher
percentage of efforts targeting AYA reported achieving condom use pre-behavioral outcomes (71%)
compared to the overall sample (58%).
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 9 of 21

Table 5. Significant effects reported.

Overall Youth and Young Adults Other Populations

Coding Category
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Product/Awareness or Reaction 37 37% 9 26% 28 44%
Condom Use Pre-Behavioral Outcomes 57 58% 25 71% 32 50%
Condom Use Behavioral Outcomes 56 57% 19 54% 37 58%
Sales/Distribution 23 23% 5 14% 18 28%

Next, we analyzed the significant effects data by publications that reported capturing each outcome
data category. Table 6 presents the success ratio of significant findings over the studies that reported
measuring each specific outcome (i.e., the proportion of articles that reported significant findings for a
particular outcome variable over the number of articles that assessed that variable), both overall and
by specific intervention characteristics, such as media channels, use of theory, and marketing Ps used.
Overall, almost all articles (96%) that assessed sales or distribution of condoms reported significant
increase in this measure. Most articles assessed condom use pre-behavioral (attitudes, social norms,
and beliefs about condom use) and condom use behavioral outcomes (use overall, frequency, and with
specific partner types), and 85% each reported significant increases.
Analyzed as a ratio, we continued to see higher significant effects on awareness and reactions to
promotions among the overall sample (71%) compared to AYA efforts (50%). However, we saw only
small differences in effects for pre-behavioral outcomes and sales/distribution but a higher percentage
of the overall sample demonstrating condom use outcomes (85%) compared to the AYA efforts (76%).
Despite these differences, it should be noted that, with the exception of awareness/reactions effects
among AYA efforts (50%), all the findings for significant effects among studies that measured specific
outcomes were generally high (greater than 70% and most above 85%), indicating that, when condom
use marketing targets these outcomes of interest, the efforts are mostly effective.
In terms of intervention characteristics, there were relatively few differences in terms of the
intermediate outcomes. One notable difference was that 90% of interventions using mass media (51 in
total) reported significant effects on attitudes, beliefs, and intentions to use condoms, and the same
percentage was displayed among programs for AYA (23 in total).
In terms of behavioral outcomes, we saw a similar pattern of consistent effects between intervention
categories, but the effects on AYA condom use were somewhat lower (72% compared to 86% for other
populations) for those using mass media.
Awareness outcomes were consistently lower overall and lower among AYA compared to the general
sample and the other populations. These results were consistent across all intervention characteristics.
Finally, the effects of condom promotion programs on sales were generally higher among AYA
compared to the overall sample and other populations across most intervention characteristics. Across
the marketing Ps, all AYA focused programs showed significant effects and were consistently higher
than the overall sample and other populations, suggesting that marketing strategies were especially
effective in encouraging condom purchases among AYA.
In a Supplementary Material to this article, Table S1 provides an overall summary of the 99 articles
that underwent full text review (references provided at the end of this manuscript). The appendix
table lists the study, the population targeted, the location, the product promoted, the marketing and
intervention components applied, and the research design and significant effects observed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 10 of 21

Table 6. Outcomes by intervention characteristics.

Intermediate outcomes by Intervention Characteristics

Overall Youth and Young Adults Other Populations
Coding category Percent Reported Percent Percent Reported Percent Percent Reported Percent
N N N
Outcome Significant Effect Outcome Significant Effect Outcome Significant Effect
Product Promoted
Male Condom 80 71% 86% 30 87% 89% 50 62% 84%
Female Condom 9 56% 60% 2 50% 100% 7 57% 50%
Both 10 50% 60% 3 33% 0% 7 57% 75%
Year of Publication
2000 to 2009 45 69% 87% 20 80% 88% 25 60% 87%
2010 to 2019 54 67% 78% 15 80% 83% 39 62% 75%
Reported Mass Media Channels 51 78% 90% 23 83% 90% 28 75% 91%
Scientific Theory Mentioned 42 86% 86% 22 91% 85% 20 80% 88%
Formative Research Mentioned 33 70% 70% 18 67% 67% 15 73% 73%
Marketing P’s
Product 66 70% 80% 22 82% 78% 44 64% 82%
Price 49 76% 81% 19 79% 73% 30 73% 86%
Place 74 65% 85% 26 77% 80% 48 58% 89%
Promotion 82 73% 83% 26 100% 78% 56 61% 82%
Sample 99 68% 85% 35 80% 89% 64 61% 82%
Behavioral Outcomes by Intervention Characteristic
Overall Youth and Young Adults Other Populations
Coding category Percent Reported Percent Percent Reported Percent Percent Reported Percent
N N N
Outcome Significant Effect Outcome Significant Effect Outcome Significant Effect
Product Promoted
Male Condom 80 68% 82% 30 73% 68% 50 64% 91%
Female Condom 9 67% 67% 2 100% 100% 7 57% 50%
Both 10 60% 83% 3 33% 100% 7 71% 80%
Year of Publication
2000 to 2009 45 73% 79% 20 70% 79% 25 76% 79%
2010 to 2019 54 61% 82% 15 73% 64% 39 56% 91%
Reported Mass Media Channels 51 78% 80% 23 78% 72% 28 79% 86%
Scientific Theory Mentioned 42 81% 82% 22 82% 83% 20 80% 81%
Formative Research Mentioned 33 67% 77% 18 67% 83% 15 67% 70%
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 11 of 21

Table 6. Cont.

Marketing P’s
Product 66 71% 81% 22 82% 78% 44 66% 83%
Price 49 78% 79% 19 79% 73% 30 77% 83%
Place 74 68% 84% 26 73% 79% 48 65% 87%
Promotion 82 71% 83% 26 88% 78% 56 63% 86%
Sample 99 67% 85% 35 71% 76% 64 64% 84%
Awareness Outcomes by Intervention Characteristics
Overall Youth and Young Adults Other Populations
Coding category Percent Reported Percent Percent Reported Percent Percent Reported Percent
N N N
Outcome Significant Effect Outcome Significant Effect Outcome Significant Effect
Product Promoted
Male Condom 80 51% 68% 30 50% 47% 50 52% 81%
Female Condom 9 56% 80% 2 50% 0% 7 57% 100%
Both 10 60% 67% 3 67% 50% 7 57% 75%
Year of Publication
2000 to 2009 45 47% 62% 20 35% 29% 25 56% 79%
2010 to 2019 54 57% 74% 15 73% 55% 39 51% 85%
Reported Mass Media Channels 51 57% 76% 23 48% 55% 28 64% 89%
Scientific Theory Mentioned 42 64% 63% 22 50% 46% 20 80% 75%
Formative Research Mentioned 33 52% 59% 18 56% 50% 15 47% 71%
Marketing P’s
Product 66 62% 73% 22 55% 50% 44 66% 83%
Price 49 63% 74% 19 53% 50% 30 70% 86%
Place 74 57% 74% 26 54% 50% 48 58% 86%
Promotion 82 55% 71% 26 65% 47% 56 50% 86%
Sample 99 53% 71% 35 51% 50% 64 53% 82%
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 12 of 21

Table 6. Cont.

Sales outcomes by Intervention Characteristics

Overall Youth and Young Adults Other Populations
Coding category Percent Reported Percent Percent Reported Percent Percent Reported Percent
N N N
Outcome Significant Effect Outcome Significant Effect Outcome Significant Effect
Product Promoted
Male Condom 80 25% 90% 30 13% 100% 50 32% 88%
Female Condom 9 0% NA 2 0% NA 7 0% NA
Both 10 40% 100% 3 33% 100% 7 43% 100%
Year of Publication
2000 to 2009 45 16% 86% 20 10% 100% 25 20% 67%
2010 to 2019 54 31% 94% 15 20% 100% 39 36% 91%
Reported Mass Media Channels 51 22% 100% 23 17% 100% 28 25% 100%
Scientific Theory Mentioned 42 12% 80% 22 5% 100% 20 20% 75%
Formative Research Mentioned 33 12% 75% 18 11% 100% 15 13% 50%
Marketing P’s
Product 66 20% 85% 22 9% 100% 44 25% 82%
Price 49 27% 92% 19 16% 100% 30 33% 90%
Place 74 30% 91% 26 19% 100% 48 35% 88%
Promotion 82 20% 94% 26 12% 100% 56 23% 92%
Sample 99 24% 96% 35 14% 100% 64 30% 90%
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 13 of 21

4. Discussion
Sustained demand generation that results in repeat, intensive exposure to behavior change
messages tailored to diverse user needs remains a critical need in many countries. Decreasing funding
for condom programming across many countries has weakened efforts to develop and deliver behavior
change interventions of the scale and the intensity necessary to overcome barriers to condom use [23].
Significantly more investment in demand generation activities ranging from branded and generic mass
media to highly targeted interpersonal communication (IPC) is needed to ensure that people—especially
youth—have the knowledge, the skills, and the power to use condoms correctly and consistently.
Condom programs must ensure that there are adequate condom supplies and distribution systems
to meet current and future user demand. Though some countries have made progress in securing
sufficient funding for condom procurement and for increasing condom distribution through the public
sector, under-served areas remain. Condom stock-outs at the facility level and condom wastage remain
challenges. Procurement of condoms in excess of reasonable projections for growth in demand also
contributes to condom wastage in some countries [24]. Efforts need to include adequate condom
and lubricant procurement and supplies, community-based distribution to priority populations,
and targeted distribution of free commodities for those with greatest need, especially in rural and
isolated locations. Decreased funding for social marketing programs and low interest from the
commercial sector in reaching beyond high value urban markets also contribute to access gaps.
This study demonstrates that condoms continue to be widely promoted worldwide and, given
the epidemiology of HIV/STIs, they remain a crucial technology for preventing transmission. In 2017,
UNAIDS estimated that 36.9 million people were living with the HIV virus with 1.8 million new
infections, the majority through unprotected sexual intercourse [25]. In addition, every day, one million
people are infected with curable STIs, while over 500 million are already affected with HSV2 and
300 million with HPV [26]. There is an urgent and, to a significant extent, unmet need for women
and girls to have access to condoms and other contraceptives. Most of these issues are more dramatic
in SSA and among young and vulnerable people. Given the “youth bulge” in SSA that is projected
to continue until the mid-21st century, there will eventually be more young people age 15–24 in the
region than in India or China [27], and related increases over time in the 25–34-year-old young adult
cohort. In part, as a result of these demographic changes, estimates suggest that condom availability
and use will represent the largest share of total HIV infections avoided by 2030 [27].
The importance of condom promotion is suggested in part by the significant body of research
in the field, some 99 published studies using the restrictive inclusion criteria in this study, and the
pace of studies increased in the decade from 2010–2019 (54 of 99 reviewed) despite recent reductions
in condom donor spending. However, it is worth noting that the percentage of studies showing a
significant effect on condom use dropped from 87% in 2000–2009 to 78% in 2010–2019. The latter may
reflect an increase in interest in evaluation data to support continued expenditures on campaigns
and justify specific approaches and population focus; however, at the same time, the effects of other
prevention and treatment efforts, such as PrEP, influence consistent condom use [12].
This review confirmed our original H1 that condom promotion studies are effective in promoting
determinants and condom use. Condom promotion studies demonstrated a high degree of effectiveness
in promoting condom use and related behavioral outcomes, with 85% demonstrating positive effects in
these areas. It is worth noting that a smaller percentage of studies demonstrated message awareness in
specific promotions (71%), indicating perhaps a need for better dosage/exposure measurement as well
as sustained delivery of promotions.
Condom promotion studies that examined sales and distribution overwhelmingly reported an
increase in sales or distribution (or both, 96%), confirming H2. Large scale condom promotion efforts
reached widespread populations, including those most in need in low and middle income countries
that face a disproportionate burden of HIV/STI infections and unmet contraceptive needs. This was
true even in the most recent years (since 2010), when donor funding for condom distribution and
promotion has declined.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 14 of 21

Best practice marketing techniques were widely used in condom promotion, with the majority of
studies employing multiple marketing channels and Ps from marketing theory. Additionally, a wide
mix of marketing channels were used, and these were generally targeted to the media platforms most
widely used in the country/region. In particular, there was widespread use of community outreach,
radio, and outdoor advertising promotion. It is worth noting that relatively few studies used social
media or other digital media to promote condoms, likely because they were often conducted in
LMIC. However, this represents an opportunity to expand the reach and the recognition of condom
promotion efforts.
In terms of RQ1 and whether condom promotion efforts have targeted or have been more effective
among population groups such as AYA or in specific geographic locations and other settings, we made
several findings. First, a disproportionate number (35 of 99) of condom promotion effort targeted AYA
populations compared to other age sub-groups. Given that AYA are at greater risk, this is promising.
However, it is worth noting that the majority of these AYA targeted efforts were in the US and Canada,
and a disproportionately smaller number were in Sub-Saharan Africa, where condom promotion will
be greatly needed in the coming decade and beyond.
We also observed greater use of mass media channels and greater use of behavior change theory
in AYA condom promotion efforts compared to the overall sample. Thus, these efforts have potential to
reach wider AYA audiences and are guided by solid conceptual foundations. We observed significant
effects of AYA targeted efforts but overall not greater effects than on the overall sample. We did
observe lower levels of effects on product awareness and positive reactions to promotions, but this
may also reflect differences in media preferences and use. Given that we found very few efforts that
utilized digital and social media, especially in the decade from 2010–2019, when such strategies become
widespread in public health, this may reflect a need and an opportunity to shift condom promotion
campaigns to the channels most used by AYA.
Overall, condom promotion efforts with AYA when specific outcomes of increasing positive
attitudes, social norms, and beliefs as well as condom use behavior and sales/distribution were targeted
were effective. This is promising, given that AYA are often hard to reach and at risk. This review
suggests that condom promotion efforts are at least equally effective with AYA as with the overall
sample of marketing promotions, and thus, considering the massive need for programs given rising
AYA populations, such efforts deserve greater emphasis and attention.
There is a need for more research that sheds light on how best to build healthy markets (total
market approach) for condoms [28,29]. More research is needed on how to successfully market
condoms and encourage condom use using digital media marketing strategies that the youth and the
young adult audience increasingly use in LMIC.
Despite its many strengths and new information yielded by this systematic review, the study has
some limitations. First, promotion terminology is known to be difficult to identify in some cases due to
inconsistent use of language in communication and marketing literature [30,31]. Second, we did not
conduct a meta-analysis and thus cannot comment on the quality of actual data analysis or reporting
of data in the reviewed papers. Finally, we acknowledge that there is substantial gray literature on
communication and marketing campaigns in LMIC, and many condom promotion and distribution
efforts are captured there and not in this study. For purposes of consistency and knowing the universe
of articles to be screened, we elected to follow the PRISMA methodology and restrict our focus to
peer-reviewed literature.

5. Conclusions
Despite advances in HIV treatments, including pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), condoms remain
an essential prevention method, especially in light of the tremendous demographic shifts in sub-Saharan
Africa over the coming decade [15]. New priorities to ensure sufficient donor support for condom
promotion programs are needed in the new environment for HIV/STI prevention. Condoms remain an
essential strategy, and the evidence reviewed here shows that marketing promotions are effective in
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 15 of 21

encouraging condom use behavior, sales, and distribution outcomes, and new intervention strategies
utilizing digital media, the channel most widely used by priority populations such as AYA, should
continue to be developed and evaluated.

Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at http://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/7/2262/s1,

Table S1: Summary of Articles Reviewed [13,14,32–128].
Author Contributions: W.D.E. conceptualized the study, developed the search strategy, coded articles, collaborated
on the analysis, and wrote the article. A.U. coded articles, conducted the analysis, and contributed to the article.
M.H. assisted in initial article screening and creating tables. B.D. contributed to the article. All authors have read
and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This project was sponsored by the United Nations Family Planning Agency
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest with this study.

References
1. Evidence for Contraceptive Options and HIV Outcomes (ECHO). HIV incidence among women using
intramuscular depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, a copper IUD, or a levonorgestrel implant for
contraception: A randomised multicentre, open-label trial. Lancet 2019. [CrossRef]
2. UNAIDS. UNAIDS Data 2019. Available online: https://www.unaids.org/en/resources/documents/2019/2019-
UNAIDS-data (accessed on 20 January 2020).
3. Mann Global Health. Challenges and Recommendations for Reaching ‘Fast Track’ Targets for Condom Use.
Available online: https://mannglobalhealth.com/what-we-do/reports/ (accessed on 19 January 2020).
4. Mann Global Health. Donor Funding Landscape for Condom Programming. Available online: https:
//mannglobalhealth.com/what-we-do/reports/ (accessed on 20 January 2020).
5. Weller, S.; Davis, K. Condom effectiveness in reducing heterosexual HIV transmission. Cochrane Database
Syst. Rev. 2002, 1, CD003255. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6. Smith, D.; Herbst, J.A.; Zhang, X.; Rose, C.E. Condom efficacy by consistency of use among men who have sex
with men. In Proceedings of the 20th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (CROI 2013),
Atlanta, GA, USA, 3–6 March 2013.
7. Johnson, W.D.; O’Leary, A.; Flores, S.A. Per-partner condom effectiveness against HIV for men who have sex
with men. AIDS 2018, 32, 1499–1505. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
8. Trussell, J.; Sturgen, K.; Strickler, J.; Dominik, R. Comparative contraceptive efficacy of the female condom
and other barrier methods. Fam. Plan. Perspect. 1994, 26, 66–72. [CrossRef]
9. Dehne, K.L.; Dallabetta, G.; Wilson, D. HIV prevention 2020: a framework for delivery and a call for action.
Lancet 2016, 3, e323–e332. [CrossRef]
10. Mann Global Health. Condom Program Pathway. Available online: https://mannglobalhealth.com/wp-
content/uploads/2017/11/MGH_Condom-Landscaping-Report_Final_091117.pdf (accessed on 20 January
2020).
11. Gilson, L.; Lehmann, U.; Schneider, H. Practicing governance towards equity in health systems:
LMIC perspectives and experience. Int. J. Equity Health 2017, 16, 171. [CrossRef]
12. Holt, M.; Newman, C.E.; Lancaster, K.; Smith, A.K.; Hughes, S.; Truong, H.-H.M. HIV pre-exposure
prophylaxis and the ‘problems’ of reduced condom use and sexually transmitted infections in Australia:
A critical analysis from an evidence-making intervention perspective. Sociol. Health Illn. 2019. [CrossRef]
13. Chapman, S.; Jafa, K.; Longfield, K.; Vielot, N.A.; Buszin, J.; Ngamkitpaiboon, L.; Kays, M. Condom social
marketing in sub-Saharan Africa and the Total Market Approach. Sex. Health 2012, 9, 44–50. [CrossRef]
14. Evans, W.; Taruberekera, N.; Longfield, K.; Snider, J. Brand Equity and Willing to Pay for Condoms In
Zimbabwe. Reprod. Health 2011, 8, 29. [CrossRef]
15. Canning, D.; Raja, S.; Yazbeck, A.S. Africa’s Demographic Transition: Dividend or Disaster? Africa Development
Forum Series; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2015. [CrossRef]
16. Higgins, J.P.T.; Green, S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions; Version 5.1.0 [updated
March 2011]; The Cochrane Collaboration: London, UK, 2011.
17. Evans, W.D.; Blitstein, J.; Hersey, J.; Renaud, J.; Yaroch, A. Systematic review of public health branding.
J. Health Commun. 2008, 13, 721–741. [CrossRef]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 16 of 21

18. Snyder, L.B.; Hamilton, M.A.; Huedo-Medina, T. Does evaluation design impact communication campaign
effect size? A meta-analysis. Commun. Methods Meas. 2009, 3, 84–104. [CrossRef]
19. Covey, J.; Rosenthal-Stott, H.E.S.; Howell, S.J. A synthesis of meta-analytic evidence of behavioral
interventions to reduce HIV/STIs. J. Behav. Med. 2016, 39, 371–385. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
20. LaCroix, J.M.; Snyder, L.B.; Huedo-Medina, T.B.; Johnson, B.T. Effectiveness of mass media interventions for
HIV prevention, 1986–2013: A meta-analysis. J. Acquir. Immune Defic. Syndr. 2014, 66, S329–S340. [CrossRef]
21. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.; The PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for
Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med. 2009, 6, e1000097. [CrossRef]
22. Kotler, P.; Lee, N. Social Marketing: Changing Behviors for Good, 4th ed.; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2011.
23. Taruberekera, N.; Chatora, K.; Leuschner, S.; Munjoma, M.; Sithole, H.; Balasubramanian, S.; Jiyeong Park, F.;
Rego, R.; Rowan, A.; Longfield, K. Strategic donor investments for strengthening condom markets: The case
of Zimbabwe. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0221581. [CrossRef]
24. Beksinska, M.E.; Smit, J.A.; Mantell, J.E. Progress and challenges to male and female condom use in South
Africa. Sex. Health 2012, 9, 51–58. [CrossRef]
25. Girum, T.; Wasie, A.; Worku, A. Trend of HIV/AIDS for the last 26 years and predicting achievement of the
90-90-90 HIV prevention targets by 2020 in Ethiopia: A time series analysis. BMC Infect Dis. 2018, 18, 320.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
26. Dwyer-Lindgren, L.; Cork, M.A.; Sligar, A.; Steuben, K.M.; Wilson, K.F.; Provost, N.R.; Mayala, B.K.;
Vanderheide, J.D.; Collison, M.L.; Hall, J.B.; et al. Mapping HIV prevalence in sub-Saharan Africa between
2000 and 2017. Nature 2019, 570, 189–193. [CrossRef]
27. United Nations. World Population Prospects 2019. Available online: https://population.un.org/wpp/
Publications/Files/WPP2019_DataBooklet.pdf (accessed on 20 January 2020).
28. Evans, W.D.; Kadirov, K.; Thior, I.; Ganesan, R.; Ulasevich, A.; Deperthes, B. Willingness to Pay for Condoms
among men in Sub-Saharan Africa. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 16, 34. [CrossRef]
29. Brady, C.; Weeden, L.; Hutchings, J.; Parks, J. Planning Guide for a Total Market Approach to Increase Access to
Family Planning. Module 1: Landscape Assessment; PATH: Seattle, WA, USA; The Population Council, Evidence
Project: Washington, DC, USA, 2016.
30. McDermott, L.; Stead, M.; Hastings, G. What is and what is not social marketing. J. Mark. Manag. 2005, 21,
545–553. [CrossRef]
31. Evans, W.D.; Blistein, J.; Vallone, D.; Post, S.; Nielsen, W. Systematic review of health branding: Growth of a
promising practice. Transl. Behav. Med. 2015, 5, 24–36. [CrossRef]
32. Adams, J.; Neville, S.; Parker, K.; Huckle, T. Influencing condom use by gay and bisexual men for anal sex
through social marketing: A program evaluation of get it on!! Soc. Mark. Quart. 2017, 23, 3–17. [CrossRef]
33. Agha, S. An Evaluation of Adolescent Sexual Health Programs in Cameroon, Botswana, South Africa, and Guinea;
Population Services International [PSI], Research Division: Washington, DC, USA, 2000.
34. Agha, S. Patterns of use of the female condom after one year of mass marketing. AIDS Educ. Prev. 2001, 13,
55–64. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
35. Agha, S. Intention to use the female condom following a mass-marketing campaign in Lusaka, Zambia. Am.
J. Public Health 2001, 91, 307–310. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
36. Agha, S. The Impact of the Kenya Social Marketing Program on Personal Risk Perception, Perceived Self-Efficacy and
on Other Behavioral Predictors; Population Services International PSI], Research Division: Washington, DC,
USA, 2001.
37. Agha, S. A Quasi-Experimental Study to Assess the Impact of Four Adolescent Sexual Health
Interventions in Sub-Saharan Africa. Int. Fam. Plan. Perspect. 2002, 28, 67–70. Available
online: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0036624275&partnerID=40&md5=
974615733e4916ccf11c7f95e2802fc3;https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0036624275&
partnerID=40&md5=974615733e4916ccf11c7f95e2802fc3 (accessed on 11 February 2020). [CrossRef]
38. Agha, S.; Van Rossem, R. Impact of mass media campaigns on intentions to use the female condom in
tanzania. Int. Fam. Plan. Perspect. 2002, 28, 151–158. [CrossRef]
39. Agha, S. The impact of a mass media campaign on personal risk perception, perceived self-efficacy and on
other behavioural predictors. AIDS Care 2003, 15, 749–762. [CrossRef]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 17 of 21

40. Agha, S.; Karlyn, A.; Meekers, D. The promotion of condom use in non-regular sexual partnerships in urban
mozambique. Health Policy Plan. 2001, 16, 144–151. Available online: https://www.scopus.com/inward/
record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0035018955&partnerID=40&md5=f2a3c0864010c13eb6811feacdc8650b (accessed on 11
February 2020). [CrossRef]
41. Agha, S.; Meekers, D. Impact of an advertising campaign on condom use in urban pakistan. Stud. Fam. Plan.
2010, 41, 277–290. [CrossRef]
42. Agha, S.; Beaudoin, C.E. Assessing a thematic condom advertising campaign on condom use in urban
pakistan. J. Health Commun. 2012, 17, 601–623. [CrossRef]
43. Artz, L.; Macaluso, M.; Kelaghan, J.; Austin, H.; Fleenor, M.; Robey, L.; Hook, E.W.; Brill, I. An intervention to
promote the female condom to sexually transmitted disease clinic patients. Behav. Modif. 2005, 29, 318–369.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
44. Ashraf, N.; Bandiera, O.; Jack, B.K. No margin, no mission? A field experiment on incentives for public
service delivery. J. Public Econ. 2014, 120, 1–17. [CrossRef]
45. Aung, T.; Thet, M.M.; Sudhinaraset, M.; Diamond-Smith, N. Impact of a social franchise intervention program
on the adoption of long and short acting family planning methods in hard to reach communities in myanmar.
J. Public Health (Oxf. Engl.) 2019, 41, 192–200. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
46. Basu, I.; Jana, S.; Rotheram-Borus, M.; Swendeman, D.; Lee, S.; Newman, P.; Weiss, R. HIV prevention among
sex workers in india. JAIDS J. Acquir. Immune Defic. Syndr. 2004, 36, 845–852. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
47. Benzaken, A.S.; Garcia, E.G.; Gomes Sardinha, J.C.; Pedrosa, V.L.; Paiva, V. Community-based intervention
to control STD/AIDS in the amazon region, Brazil. Rev. Saude Publica 2007, 41, 2.
48. Bhaskar, R.S. Impact of a behaviour change intervention model for promotion of condoms amongst young
adult males in an occupational setting. Med. J. Armed Forces India 2012, 68, 316–321. [CrossRef]
49. Brent, R. A cost-benefit analysis of a condom social marketing programme in tanzania. Appl. Econ. 2009, 41,
497–509. [CrossRef]
50. Brown, B. At nicaraguan motels rented for sexual encounters, making condoms available in rooms increases
use. Int. Fam. Plan. Perspect. 2000, 26, 201–202. Available online: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/
2620100.html (accessed on 26 March 2020). [CrossRef]
51. Bull, S.S.; Cohen, J.; Ortiz, C.; Evans, T. The POWER campaign for promotion of female and male condoms:
Audience research and campaign development. Health Commun. 2002, 14, 475–491. [CrossRef]
52. Bull, S.S.; Posner, S.F.; Ortiz, C.; Beaty, B.; Benton, K.; Lin, L.; Pals, S.L.; Evans, T. POWER for reproductive
health: Results from a social marketing campaign promoting female and male condoms. J. Adolesc. Health
2008, 43, 71–78. [CrossRef]
53. Bull, S.S.; Levine, D.K.; Black, S.R.; Schmiege, S.J.; Santelli, J. Social media-delivered sexual health intervention:
A cluster randomized controlled trial. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2012, 43, 467–474. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
54. Bulsara, A.L. Social Marketing for Adolescent Sexual Health: Results of Operations Research Projects in Botswana,
Cameroon, Guinea, and South Africa; Population Services International PSI: Washington, DC, USA, 2000;
Available online: http://www.prb.org/pdf/SocialMarketAdolesc_Eng.pdf (accessed on 26 March 2020).
55. Burke, R.C.; Wilson, J.; Bernstein, K.T.; Grosskopf, N.; Murrill, C.; Cutler, B.; Sweeney, M.; Begier, E.M.
The NYC condom: Use and acceptability of new york city’s branded condom. Am. J. Public Health 2009, 99.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
56. Burke, R.C.; Wilson, J.; Kowalski, A.; Murrill, C.; Cutler, B.; Sweeney, M.; Begier, E.M. NYC condom use
and satisfaction and demand for alternative condom products in new york city sexually transmitted disease
clinics. J. Urban Health Bull. N. Y. Acad. Med. 2011, 88, 749–758. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
57. Cerdeño, A.F.; Martinez-Donate, A.P.; Zellner, J.; Sañudo, F.; Carrillo, H.; Engelberg, M.; Sipan, C.L.; Hovell, M.
Marketing HIV prevention for heterosexually identified latino men who have sex with men and women:
The hombres sanos campaign. J. Health Commun. 2012, 17, 641–658. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
58. Cheng, H.D. Promoting contraceptive use more effectively among unmarried male migrants in construction
sites in china: A pilot intervention trial. Asia Pac. J. Public Health 2012, 24, 806–815. [CrossRef]
59. Chiang, K.-P.; Chan, A.; Milan, R. Social marketing and advertising appeals: On perception and intention to
purchase condoms among college students. Int. J. Healthc. Manag. 2018, 11, 71–78. [CrossRef]
60. Crosby, R.; DiClemente, R.J.; Charnigo, R.; Snow, G.; Troutman, A. A brief, clinic-based, safer sex intervention
for heterosexual african american men newly diagnosed with an STD: A randomized controlled trial. Am. J.
Public Health 2009, 99 (Suppl. 1), S96–S103. [CrossRef]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 18 of 21

61. Darden, C. Promoting condoms in brazil to men who have sex with men. Reprod. Health Matters 2006, 14,
63–67. [CrossRef]
62. Davis, K.C.; Uhrig, J.; Bann, C.; Rupert, D.; Fraze, J. Exploring african american women’s perceptions of a
social marketing campaign to promote HIV testing. Soc. Mark. Quart. 2011, 17, 39–60. [CrossRef]
63. Jarlais, D.C.D.; McKnight, C.; Arasteh, K.; Feelemyer, J.; Perlman, D.; Hagan, H.; Cooper, H.L.F. Use of the
“nYC condom” among people who use drugs. J. Urban Health 2014, 91, 547–554. [CrossRef]
64. Jarlais, D.C.D.; Arastéh, K.; McKnight, C.; Feelemyer, J.; Hagan, H.; Cooper, H.L.F.; Perlman, D.C. Combined
HIV prevention, the new york city condom distribution program, and the evolution of safer sex behavior
among persons who inject drugs in new york city. AIDS Behav. 2014, 18, 443–451. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
65. Martinez-Donate, A.P.; Zellner, J.; Sañudo, F.; Fernández-Cerdeño, A.; Hovell, M.F.; Sipan, C.L.; Engelberg, M.;
Carrillo, H. Hombres sanos: Evaluation of a social marketing campaign for heterosexually identified latino
men who have sex with men and women. Am. J. Public Health 2010, 100, 2532–2540. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
66. Drake, J.K.; Thi Thanh, L.H.; Suraratdecha, C.; Thi Thu, H.P.; Vail, J.G. Stakeholder perceptions of a total
market approach to family planning in Vietnam. Reprod. Health Matters 2010, 18, 46–55. [CrossRef]
67. Drake, J.K.; Espinoza, H.; Suraratdecha, C.; Lacayo, Y.; Keith, B.M.; Vail, J.G. Stakeholder perceptions of a
total market approach to family planning in nicaragua. Rev. Panam. Salud Publica Pan Am. J. Public Health
2011, 29, 329–336. Available online: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-79959992214&
partnerID=40&md5=c60853605320f2b1a2fbbc41bdf0b266 (accessed on 11 February 2020).
68. Eloundou-Enyegue, P.; Meekers, D.; Calvès, A.E. From awareness to adoption: The effect of aids education
and condom social marketing on condom use in tanzania (1993–1996). J. Biosoc. Sci. 2005, 37, 257–268.
[CrossRef]
69. Evans, W.D.; Longfield, K.; Shekhar, N.; Rabemanatsoa, A.; Reerink, I.; Snider, J. Social Marketing and
Condom Promotion in Madagascar: A Case Study in Brand Equity Research. In The Handbook of Global Health
Communication; Obregon, R., Waisbord, S., Eds.; Wiley-Blackwell: New York, NY, USA, 2012; pp. 330–347.
[CrossRef]
70. Farris, K.B.; Aquilino, M.L.; Batra, P.; Marshall, V.; Losch, M.E. Impact of a passive social marketing
intervention in community pharmacies on oral contraceptive and condom sales: A quasi-experimental study.
BMC Public Health 2015, 15. [CrossRef]
71. Flowers, P.; McDaid, L.M.; Knussen, C. Exposure and impact of a mass media campaign targeting sexual
health amongst scottish men who have sex with men: An outcome evaluation. BMC Public Health 2013, 13.
[CrossRef]
72. Fontu, A. Exploring the impact of social marketing of female condoms in the city of kumba, cameroon.
2010-2011. Aids Res. Hum. Retrovir. 2014, 30, A199–A200. [CrossRef]
73. Geibel, S.; King’ola, N.; Temmerman, M.; Luchters, S. The impact of peer outreach on HIV knowledge and
prevention behaviours of male sex workers in mombasa, kenya. Sex. Transm. Infect. 2012, 88, 357–362.
[CrossRef]
74. Ganesan, R. Assessment of the Retail Environment of Male Condoms in Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa,
Zambia, and zimbabwearlington, Virginia, JSI Research and Training Institute, Strengthening High Impact
Interventions for an AIDS-Free Generation AIDSFree. 2017. Available online: https://aidsfree.usaid.gov/
sites/default/files/2017.10.25_af-retail-env-condoms-rep.pdf (accessed on 26 March 2020).
75. Grey, M.N. Central american sex workers’ introduction of the female condom to different types of sexual
partners. AIDS Educ. Prev. 2010, 22, 466–481. [CrossRef]
76. Kennedy, S.; Harris, A.; Jubwe, S.; Taylor, C.; Martin, R.; Bee, E.; Perry, O.; Massaquoi, M.; Woods, D.;
Barbu, E. Condom Social Marketing Program to Prevent HIV/AIDS in Postconflict Liberia. Afr. Health
Sci. 2011, 11, S81. Available online: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-80053639632&
partnerID=40&md5=650603365096c32a6f812ec99ece39e2;https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=
2-s2.0-80053639632&partnerID=40&md5=650603365096c32a6f812ec99ece39e2 (accessed on 11 February
2020). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
77. Hernandez, J.H.; Akilimali, P.Z.; Muanda, M.F.; Glover, A.L.; Bertrand, J.T. Evolution of a large-scale
community-based contraceptive distribution program in kinshasa, DRC based on process evaluation.
Glob. Health Sci. Pract. 2018, 6, 657–667. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
78. Hill, C.A.; Abraham, C. School-based, randomised controlled trial of an evidence-based condom promotion
leaflet. Psychol. Health 2008, 23, 41–56. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 19 of 21

79. Hoke, T.H.; Feldblum, P.J.; Van Damme, K.; Nasution, M.D.; Grey, T.W.; Wong, E.L.; Ralimamonjy, L.;
Raharimalala, L.; Rasamindrakotroka, A. Randomised controlled trial of alternative male and female condom
promotion strategies targeting sex workers in madagascar. Sex. Transm. Infect. 2007, 83, 448–453. [CrossRef]
80. Joanis, C.; Beksinska, M.; Hart, C.; Tweedy, K.; Linda, J.; Smit, J. Three new female condoms: Which do
south-african women prefer? Contraception 2011, 83, 248–254. [CrossRef]
81. Katende, B.R. Multi-media campaign exposure effects on knowledge and use of condoms for STI and
HIV/AIDS prevention in uganda. Eval. Program Plan. 2004, 27, 397–407.
82. Kennedy, M.G.; Mizuno, Y.; Seals, B.F.; Myllyluoma, J.; Weeks-Norton, K. Increasing condom use among
adolescents with coalition-based social marketing. Aids 2000, 14, 1809–1818. [CrossRef]
83. Kennedy, S.B.; Nolen, S.; Pan, Z.; Smith, B.; Applewhite, J.; Vanderhoff, K.J. Effectiveness of a brief condom
promotion program in reducing risky sexual behaviours among african american men. J. Eval. Clin. Pract.
2013, 19, 408–413. [CrossRef]
84. Liao, N.L. Promoting female condoms in the sex industry in 4 towns of southern china: Context matters.
Sex. Transm. Dis. 2013, 40, 264–270. [CrossRef]
85. Lin, Y.J.; Lee, C.H.; Chang, C.C.; Lin, C.H. Evaluation of a video-based intervention to promote condom use
among college students in taiwan. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 2016, 226, 101–104.
86. Longfield, K.; Panyanouvong, X.; Chen, J.; Kays, M.B. Increasing safer sexual behavior among lao kathoy
through an integrated social marketing approach. BMC Public Health 2011, 11. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
87. Lugada, E.S.; Millar, D.; Haskew, J.; Grabowsky, M.; Garg, N.; Vestergaard, M.; Kahn, J.; Muraguri, N.;
Mermin, J. Rapid implementation of an integrated large-scale HIV counseling and testing, malaria,
and diarrhea prevention campaign in rural kenya. PLoS ONE 2010, 5, e12435. [CrossRef]
88. Martinez-Donate, A.P.; Zellner, J.; Fernández-Cerdeño, A.; Sañudo, F.; Hovell, M.F.; Sipan, C.L.; Engelberg, M.;
Ji, M. Hombres sanos: Exposure and response to a social marketing hiv prevention campaign targeting
heterosexually identified latino men who have sex with men and women. Aids Educ. Prev. 2009, 21, 124–136.
[CrossRef]
89. McBride, S.D. A tailored minimal self-help intervention to promote condom use in young women: Results
from a randomized trial. Aids 2003, 17, 1547–1556.
90. McCool-Myers, M. Implementing condom distribution programs in the United States: Qualitative insights
from program planners. Eval. Program Plan. 2019, 74, 20–26. [CrossRef]
91. Meekers, D. Going underground and going after women: Trends in sexual risk behaviour among gold
miners in South Africa. Int. J. STD AIDS 2000, 11, 21–26. [CrossRef]
92. Meekers, D. The effectiveness of targeted social marketing to promote adolescent reproductive health:
The case of Soweto, South Africa. J. HIV/AIDS Prev. Educ. Adolesc. Child. 2000, 3, 73–92. [CrossRef]
93. Meekers, D.; Richter, K. Factors associated with use of the female condom in Zimbabwe. Int. Fam. Plan.
Perspect. 2005, 31, 30–37. [CrossRef]
94. Meekers, D.; Agha, S.; Klein, M. The impact on condom use of the “100% jeune” social marketing program in
Cameroon. J. Adolesc. Health 2005, 36, 530.e12. [CrossRef]
95. Van, M.D. Using Behavior Change Communications to Overcome Social Marketing Sales Plateaus. Case Studies
of Nigeria and India; Emerging Markets Group, Commercial Market Strategies: Washington, DC, USA,
2004; Available online: http://shopsproject.org/sites/default/files/resources/910_file_07_Nigeria_and_India_
Behavior_Change_Communications.pdf (accessed on 11 February 2020).
96. Van, M.D. The Reach and Impact of Social Marketing and Reproductive Health Communication Campaigns in Zambia;
Carolina Population Center CPC, Measure Evaluation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: Chapel
Hill, NC, USA, 2004; Available online: http://www.cpc.unc.edu/measure/publications/pdf/wp-04-77.pdf
(accessed on 26 March 2020).
97. Morris, C.N.; Morris, S.R.; Ferguson, A.G. Sexual behavior of female sex workers and access to condoms in
kenya and uganda on the trans-africa highway. Aids and Behav. 2009, 13, 860–865. [CrossRef]
98. Piot, B.; Mukherjee, A.; Navin, D.; Krishnan, N.; Bhardwaj, A.; Sharma, V.; Marjara, P. Lot quality assurance
sampling for monitoring coverage and quality of a targeted condom social marketing programme in
traditional and non-traditional outlets in india. Sex. Transm. Infect. 2010, 86, 56–61. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
99. Plautz, A.; Meekers, D. Evaluation of the reach and impact of the 100% jeune youth social marketing program
in Cameroon: Findings from three cross-sectional surveys. Reprod. Health 2007, 4. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 20 of 21

100. Porto, M.P. Fighting AIDS among adolescent women: Effects of a public communication campaign in Brazil.
J. Health Commun. 2007, 12, 121–132. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
101. Potter, W.; de Villemeur, M. Clinical breakage, slippage and acceptability of a new commercial polyurethane
condom: A randomized, controlled study. Contraception 2003, 68, 39–45. [CrossRef]
102. Purdy, C.H. Fruity, fun and safe: Creating a youth condom brand in Indonesia. Reprod. Health Matters 2006,
14, 127–134. [CrossRef]
103. Purdy, C.H. Using the internet and social media to promote condom use in turkey. Reprod. Health Matters
2011, 19, 157–165. [CrossRef]
104. Rachakulla, H.K.; Venkaiah, K.; Rajkumar, H.; Prasad, S.; Kallam, S.; Goswami, P.; Dale, J.; Adhikary, R.;
Paranjape, R.; Brahmam, G.N.V. Condom use and prevalence of syphilis and HIV among female sex workers
in Andhra Pradesh, India—Following a large-scale HIV prevention intervention. BMC Public Health 2011, 11.
[CrossRef]
105. Ramanathan, S.; Deshpande, S.; Gautam, A.; Pardeshi, D.B.; Ramakrishnan, L.; Goswami, P.; Adhikary, R.;
George, B.; Paranjape, R.S.; Mainkar, M.M. Increase in condom use and decline in prevalence of sexually
transmitted infections among high-risk men who have sex with men and transgender persons in Maharashtra,
India: AVAHAN, the India AIDS initiative. BMC Public Health 2014, 14. [CrossRef]
106. Renaud, T.C.; Bocour, A.; Irvine, M.K.; Bernstein, K.T.; Begier, E.M.; Sepkowitz, K.A.; Kellerman, S.E.;
Weglein, D. The free condom initiative: Promoting condom availability and use in New York City. Public
Health Rep. 2009, 124, 481–489. [CrossRef]
107. Ridlo, I.A.; Zein, R.A. #CondomEmoji: Are urban Indonesians receptive to a social media-based campaign
for safer sex? Health Educ. 2018, 118, 386–401. [CrossRef]
108. Robinson, B.E.; Uhl, G.; Miner, M.; Bockting, W.O.; Scheltema, K.E.; Rosser, B.R.S.; Westover, B.
Evaluation of a Sexual Health Approach to Prevent HIV among Low Income, Urban, Primarily African
American Women: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial. AIDS Educ. Prev. 2002, 14, 81–96.
Available online: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0035987819&partnerID=40&md5=
90641036f45681fd954398267c6e7ec4 (accessed on 11 February 2020). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
109. Rovniak, L.S.; Hovell, M.F.; Hofstetter, C.R.; Blumberg, E.J.; Sipan, C.L.; Batista, M.F.; Martinez-Donate, A.P.;
Mulvihill, M.M.; Ayala, G.X. Engaging community businesses in human immunodeficiency virus prevention:
A feasibility study. Am. J. Health Promot. 2010, 24, 347–353. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
110. Ryder, H.; Aspden, T.; Sheridan, J. The hawke’s bay condom card scheme: A qualitative study of the views
of service providers on increased, discreet access for youth to free condoms. Int. J. Pharm. Pract. 2015, 23,
381–389. [CrossRef]
111. Sharma, V.; Saggurti, N.; Bharat, S. Association between system reach and exposure to interventions and
characteristics of mobile female sex workers in four high HIV prevalence states in India. Glob. J. Health Sci.
2015, 7, 83–95. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
112. Sales, J.M.; Brown, J.L.; Diclemente, R.J.; Rose, E. Exploring factors associated with nonchange in condom
use behavior following participation in an STI/HIV prevention intervention for African-American adolescent
females. AIDS Res. Treat. 2012. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
113. Scott-Sheldon, L.; Glasford, D.E.; Marsh, K.L.; Lust, S.A. Barriers to condom purchasing: Effects of product
positioning on reactions to condoms. Soc. Sci. Med. 2006, 63, 2755–2769. [CrossRef]
114. Seidenfeld, D. An intervention to increase the condom supply in rural Zambia. Stud. Fam. Plan. 2014, 45,
379–387. [CrossRef]
115. Seoane Pascual, L. Qualitative Assessment of a Campaign Promoting Condom Use among a Teenage and
Young Adult Population in the Community of Madrid, Spain. Rev. Esp. Salud Publica 2002, 76, 509–516.
Available online: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0036709452&partnerID=40&md5=
41f63bb9d9f6797af347d52194d04707;https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0036709452&
partnerID=40&md5=41f63bb9d9f6797af347d52194d04707 (accessed on 26 March 2020). [CrossRef]
116. Sewak, A.; Singh, G. Assessment of the fiji-based condom social marketing (CSM) program. Sex. Cult. 2012,
16, 389–407. [CrossRef]
117. Sharma, V.; Saggurti, N.; Bharat, S. Health care coverage among long-distance truckers in India: An evaluation
based on the tanahashi model. HIV Aids Research Palliat. Care 2015, 7, 83–94. [CrossRef]
118. Sood, S.; Nambiar, D. Comparative cost-effectiveness of the components of a behavior change communication
campaign on HIV/AIDS in north India. J. Health Commun. 2006, 11, 143–162. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2262 21 of 21

119. Tan, J.; Cai, R.; Lu, Z.; Cheng, J.; De Vlas, S.J.; Richardus, J.H. Joint marketing as a framework for targeting
men who have sex with men in china: A pilot intervention study. AIDS Educ. Prev. 2013, 25, 102–111.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
120. Terris-Prestholt, F.; Windmeijer, F. How to sell a condom? the impact of demand creation tools on male and
female condom sales in resource limited settings. J. Health Econ. 2016, 48, 107–120. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
121. Tomnay, J.E.; Hatch, B. Council-supported condom vending machines: Are they acceptable to rural
communities? Sex. Health 2013, 10, 465–466. [CrossRef]
122. Tran, B.R.; Thomas, A.G.; Vaida, F.; Ditsela, M.; Phetogo, R.; Kelapile, D.; Haubrich, R.; Chambers, C.D.;
Shaffer, R. An intervention study examining the effects of condom wrapper graphics and scent on condom use
in the botswana defence force. AIDS Care Psychol. Socio Med. Asp. AIDS/HIV 2014, 26, 890–898. [CrossRef]
123. Uhrig, J.D.; Bann, C.M.; Wasserman, J.; Guenther-Grey, C.; Eroǧlu, D. Audience reactions and receptivity to
HIV prevention message concepts for people living with HIV. AIDS Educ. Prev. 2010, 22, 110–125. [CrossRef]
124. Van, A.S. The Impact of Mass Media Campaigns on Intentions to Use the Female Condom in Tanzania; Population
Services International PSI, Research Division: Washington, DC, USA, 2001.
125. Van Rossem, R.; Meekers, D. An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Targeted Social Marketing to Promote
Adolescent and Young Adult Reproductive Health in Cameroon. AIDS Educ. Prev. 2000, 12, 383–404.
Available online: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0033766275&partnerID=40&md5=
e9b17efc487dbe2dd880bbd390b1f56e (accessed on 11 February 2020).
126. Weigold, T.D. AIDS public service announcements: Effects of fear and repetition on predictors of condom
use. Health Mark. Quart. 2001, 18, 39–61.
127. Williams, J.L.; Christensen, C.J.; Cagle, H.H.; Homan, C.E. Brief report on the effect of providing single
versus assorted brand name condoms to hospital patients: A descriptive study. BMC Public Health 2001, 1,
1–4. [CrossRef]
128. Young, T.M.; Marks, M.J.; Zaikman, Y.; Zeiber, J.A. Situational influences on condom purchasing. Sex. Cult.
2017, 21, 925–941. [CrossRef]

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).