ArticleAIDS care2018
HIV-discordant and concordant HIV-positive male couples' recommendations for how an eHealth HIV prevention toolkit for concordant HIV-negative male couples could be improved to meet their specific needs.
Article in AIDS care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Electronic and other new media technology interventions for HIV care and prevention: a systematic review.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2020Pooled it
- Feasibility and Acceptability of an Electronic Health HIV Prevention Toolkit Intervention With Concordant HIV-Negative, Same-Sex Male Couples on Sexual Agreement Outcomes: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR formative research · 2020Article
- Correlates of Successful Enrollment of Same-Sex Male Couples Into a Web-Based HIV Prevention Research Study: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A number of HIV prevention interventions for male couples are in the pipeline for development as few evidence-based ones exist. Among these projects, none include all three groups of male couples (concordant HIV-negative, HIV-discordant, and concordant HIV-positive) as their target population, and only two are eHealth-based. The present qualitative study sought to assess whether one of the eHealth HIV prevention interventions for concordant HIV-negative male couples - called MCAP - could be adapted to meet the relationship and HIV prevention needs of HIV-discordant and HIV-positive male couples. Data for this study are drawn from in-person, individual-level interviews conducted with a convenience sample of 10 HIV-discordant male couples (n = 20) and 8 HIV-positive male couples (n = 16) from the Miami-Fort Lauderdale metro area in 2016. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify patterns (themes) of partners' thoughts about the toolkit, including how they perceived it could be improved for their own relationship and other couple's relationships. Two themes emerged from analysis of the qualitative data suggesting how the participants wanted the toolkit to be improved to meet their needs. Specifically, participants recommended for the toolkit to include guidance about integrating the use of biomedical HIV prevention strategies into couple's relationships, as well as for how partners can best take care of each other and further protect themselves from HIV and/or other STIs (Prevention Guidance). In addition, participants requested for the concept of sexual agreements to be broadened to include other aspects they deemed to be important in their life (e.g., mental health, exercise and nutrition) (Holistic agreements). Findings from the present study illuminate the ways in which MCAP would need to be adapted for these two groups of male couples in order to meet the needs for all three groups of male couples in the U.S. in a future iteration of this intervention.
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.