ArticleJMIR research protocols2017
Development of an Index of Engagement in HIV Care: An Adapted Internet-Based Delphi Process.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Consensus Building on Strategies That Address Medical Mistrust to Better Engage Priority Populations in HIV Cure Research.Behavioral medicine (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Article
- Resolving Challenges in HIV Cure-Related Research: Protocol for a Modified Delphi Consensus-Building Process.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- The HIV Index Is Associated With Retention in Care Among Latinx Persons Living With HIV in the CFAR Network of Integrated Clinical Systems Cohort.AIDS education and prevention : official publication of the International Society for AIDS Education · 2024Article
- Use of genotypic HIV DNA testing: a DELPHI-type consensus.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2024Article
- The Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Index: Using a Patient-Reported Outcome on Engagement in HIV Care to Explain Suboptimal Retention in Care and Virologic Control.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2021Article
- Measuring engagement in HIV care: Measurement invariance in three racial/ethnic patient groups.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2020Article
- Assessing the Content Validity of a New Patient-Reported Measure of Barriers to Antiretroviral Therapy Adherence for Electronic Administration in Routine HIV Care: Proposal for a Web-Based Delphi Study.JMIR research protocols · 2019Article
- Detecting Disengagement From HIV Care Before It Is Too Late: Development and Preliminary Validation of a Novel Index of Engagement in HIV Care.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2019Article
- Article
- If someone cares about you, you are more apt to come around: improving HIV care engagement by strengthening the patient-provider relationship.Patient preference and adherence · 2018Article
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
Abstract
backgroundImproving engagement in medical care among persons living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is critical to optimizing clinical outcomes and reducing onward transmission of HIV. However, a clear conceptualization of what it means to be engaged in HIV care is lacking, and thus efforts to measure and enhance engagement in care are limited.
objectiveThis paper describes the use of a modified online Delphi process of consensus building to solicit input from a range of HIV and non-HIV researchers and providers, and to integrate that input with focus group data conducted with HIV-infected patients. The overarching goal was to generate items for a patient-centered measure of engagement in HIV care for use in future research and clinical practice.
methodsWe recruited 66 expert panelists from around the United States. Starting with six open-ended questions, we used four rounds of online Delphi data collection in tandem with 12 in-person focus groups with patients and cognitive interviews with 25 patients.
resultsWe recruited 66 expert panelists from around the United States and 64 (97%) were retained for four rounds of data collection. Starting with six open-ended questions, we used four rounds of online Delphi data collection in tandem with 12 in-person focus groups with patients and cognitive interviews with 25 patients. The process resulted in an expansion to 120 topics that were subsequently reduced to 13 candidate items for the planned assessment measure.
conclusionsThe process was an efficient method of soliciting input from geographically separated and busy experts across a range of disciplines and professional roles with the aim of arriving at a coherent definition of engagement in HIV care and a manageable set of survey items to assess it. Next steps are to validate the utility of the new measure in predicting retention in care, adherence to treatment, and clinical outcomes among patients living with HIV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.