partner risk
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

26
(FIVE YEARS 3)

H-INDEX

10
(FIVE YEARS 0)

2019 ◽  
Vol 95 (8) ◽  
pp. 580-583
Author(s):  
Eric Richardson ◽  
Kelli A Komro ◽  
Esaa Samarah ◽  
Stephanie A S Staras

ObjectivesWe evaluated the feasibility of conducting a 9-week long sexually transmitted infection (STI) prevention intervention, Angels in Action, within an alternative disciplinary school for adolescent girls.MethodsAll girls who were 16–18 years old, enrolled in the school and did not have plans to transfer from the school were eligible to participate. We measured process feasibility with recruitment, retention and participant enjoyment. Using a pretest-post-test design with a double post-test, we used χ² tests to estimate the intervention effect on participants’ sexual partner risk knowledge, intentions to reduce partner risk and sexual activities in the past 60 days with three behavioural surveys: prior to, immediately following and 3 months after the intervention.ResultsAmong the 20 girls who were eligible, 95% (19/20) of parents consented and all girls (19/19) agreed to participate. Survey participation was 100% (19/19) prior to, 76% (13/17) immediately following and 53% (9/17) 3 months after the intervention. The intervention was administered twice and a total 17 girls participated. Session attendance was high (89%) and most participants (80%) reported enjoying the intervention. The intervention increased the percentage of girls who could identify partner characteristics associated with increased STI risk: 38% before, 92% immediately following and 100% 3 months after the intervention (p=0.01). Girls also increased their intentions to find out four of the most highly associated partner characteristics (partner’s age, recent sexual activity and STI or jail history): 32% before to 75% immediately following (p=0.02) and 67% 3 months after the intervention (p=0.09).ConclusionsThis pilot study suggests girls at alternative disciplinary schools participated in and enjoyed a 9-week STI preventive intervention. Within alternative disciplinary schools, it is potentially feasible to increase girls’ consideration of partner risk characteristics as a means to enhance their STI prevention skills.


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 429-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashish Gupta ◽  
Graeme Newell ◽  
Deepak Bajaj ◽  
Satya Mandal

PurposeInvestment in non-listed real estate funds (NREFs) in an emerging economy like India has its own challenges that entail a detailed understanding of the risks. The purpose of this paper is to identify the key risk factors across the life cycle of a NREF, based on a considered feedback of various real estate fund management stakeholders. It is important for the investors and fund managers to appreciate these risk factors to make informed investment decisions.Design/methodology/approachThe present study based on the literature survey and discussion with experts identifies 39 risk attributes, which were further summarized using factor analysis into a smaller set of factors impacting NREF returns (risk). The relative importance of each risk attribute was examined and ranked using the relative importance index (RII). Further, cluster analysis using Euclidian distance was used to partition these risk attributes in various segments depending on their importance.FindingsThe risk attributes are summarized as five risk factors, i.e. regulatory RISK, foreign direct investment risk, entry risk, business risk and project risk. Whereas the top five perceived risk attributes are investee/partner risk, project entitlement risk, title risk, legislative and regulatory risk and project execution risk.Practical implicationsThis study has significance to the industry practitioners and the academic community in developing an understanding of the dynamic nature of risks across the life cycle of the NREFs in India and classifying them at the macro-meso-micro levels.Originality/valueThis paper is one of the first attempts to understand the risks impacting NREFs in India. It will help investors develop a better strategic understanding of the risks across the life cycle of an investment.


2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (5) ◽  
pp. 1451-1463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle F. Haley ◽  
Gina M. Wingood ◽  
Michael R. Kramer ◽  
Regine Haardörfer ◽  
Adaora A. Adimora ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (9) ◽  
pp. 537-541 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie AS. Staras ◽  
Melvin D. Livingston ◽  
Kelli A. Komro

2013 ◽  
Vol 100 (5) ◽  
pp. 1321-1325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Tüttelmann ◽  
Petar Ivanov ◽  
Charlotte Dietzel ◽  
Anna Sofroniou ◽  
Tsvetomira M. Tsvyatkovska ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 315-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Soh ◽  
Anne F Rositch ◽  
Laura Koutsky ◽  
Brandon L Guthrie ◽  
Robert Y Choi ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document