Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29095883›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Patterns of patient and healthcare provider viewpoints regarding participation in HIV cure-related clinical trials. Findings from a multicentre French survey using Q methodology (ANRS-APSEC).

Christel Protière, Bruno Spire, Marion Mora, Isabelle Poizot-Martin, Marie Préau, Marjolaine Doumergue, Philippe Morlat, David Zucman, Cécile Goujard, François Raffi and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. A scoping review of Q-methodology in healthcare research.BMC medical research methodology · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Christel ProtièreAix Marseille Univ, INSERM, IRD, SESSTIM, Sciences Economiques & Sociales de la Santé & Traitement de l'Information Médicale, Marseille, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5602-9617
Bruno SpireAix Marseille Univ, INSERM, IRD, SESSTIM, Sciences Economiques & Sociales de la Santé & Traitement de l'Information Médicale, Marseille, France.
Marion MoraAix Marseille Univ, INSERM, IRD, SESSTIM, Sciences Economiques & Sociales de la Santé & Traitement de l'Information Médicale, Marseille, France.
Isabelle Poizot-MartinAix Marseille Univ, INSERM, IRD, SESSTIM, Sciences Economiques & Sociales de la Santé & Traitement de l'Information Médicale, Marseille, France.
Marie PréauAix Marseille Univ, INSERM, IRD, SESSTIM, Sciences Economiques & Sociales de la Santé & Traitement de l'Information Médicale, Marseille, France.
Marjolaine DoumergueGRePS Lyon 2 Université, Bron, France.
Philippe MorlatService de Médecine Interne et Maladies Infectieuses, Hôpital Saint André, CHU de Bordeaux; Université de Bordeaux; INSERM U 1219; Bordeaux, France.
David ZucmanHôpital Foch, service de médecine interne, Suresnes, France.
Cécile GoujardAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Bicêtre, Service de Médecine Interne et Immunologie clinique, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France.
François RaffiUniversity Hospital, Department of Infectious Diseases, Nantes, France.
Olivier LambotteAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Bicêtre, Service de Médecine Interne et Immunologie clinique, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France.
Marie Suzan-MontiAix Marseille Univ, INSERM, IRD, SESSTIM, Sciences Economiques & Sociales de la Santé & Traitement de l'Information Médicale, Marseille, France.
Inserm · FRUniversité Paris-Sud · FRGroupe de Recherche en Psychologie Sociale · FRHôpital Foch · FRUniversité de Bordeaux · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextDespite huge advances in the fight against HIV concerning diagnosis, clinical efficacy of antiretroviral treatments (ART), patient survival and quality of life, there is still no cure. Recent developments in HIV cure research have opened the way for clinical trials which could lead to a temporary or definitive end to ART. However, ethical questions exist about related trial-participation risks. The main goal of the ANRS-APSEC survey was, using Q-methodology, to investigate the viewpoints of people living with HIV (PLWH) and HIV healthcare providers (HHP) regarding motivations for and barriers to participation in HIV Cure-related clinical trials (HCRCT). MATERIALS AND

methodsThirty-three statements were defined encompassing seven dimensions: treatment and follow-up; risks; benefits; patient-physician relationship; beliefs and attitudes; information; target population. Forty-one PLWH and 41 HHP from five French HIV services were asked to rank-order the statements.

resultsFive main viewpoints were elicited from "the most motivated" to "the most reluctant" vis-à-vis HCRCT participation. All placed importance on the wish to participate in HIV research. This result is in line with the HIV-specific culture of joint mobilization. For some viewpoints, the motivation to participate in/propose HCRCT was primarily conditioned by side-effects and/or by constraints, which overall were more accepted by PLWH than HHP. Some viewpoints placed particular importance on HCRCT recruitment strategies. Finally, some expressed a high acceptance of risks and constraints but emphasized the need for information.

conclusionHIV cure research clinical trials (HCRCT) constitute a risky yet unavoidable step towards the goal of finding a cure. To improve future HCRCT and informed consent designs, based on PLWH and HHP preferences and expectations, we need greater knowledge about how these populations perceive the risks and the benefits of HCRCT. Our results confirmed the importance of careful, studied HCRCT design, management and communication, to ensure PLWH and HHP acceptability and convergence of their expectations.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelAnti-HIV AgentsFranceHealth PersonnelHIV InfectionsHumansPatientsAnti-HIV Agents

Identifiers

PMID29095883
PMCPMC5667862
OpenAlexW2765556610

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.