Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31341930›Full record

ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2019

HIV Care for Patients With Complex Needs: A Controlled Evaluation of a Walk-In, Incentivized Care Model.

Julia C Dombrowski, Sean R Galagan, Meena Ramchandani, Shireesha Dhanireddy, Robert D Harrington, Allison Moore, Katie Hara, Mckenna Eastment, Matthew R Golden

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Implementation of Low-Barrier Human Immunodeficiency Virus Care: Lessons Learned From the Max Clinic in Seattle.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2023
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. The HIV Treat Pillar: An Update and Summary of Promising Approaches.American journal of preventive medicine · 2021
    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

9 authors.

Julia C DombrowskiDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Sean R GalaganDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Meena RamchandaniDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Shireesha DhanireddyDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Robert D HarringtonDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Allison MoorePublic Health - Seattle & King County HIV/STD Program, Seattle, Washington.
Katie HaraSocial Work, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington.
Mckenna EastmentDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Matthew R GoldenDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

Funding

University of Washington/Fred Hutch Center for AIDS ResearchP30AI027757 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI CONNIE L CELUM · 1988 to 2026
$104.9M
VENEREAL DISEASET32AI007140 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Julia Cook Dombrowski · 1985 to 2026
$19.4M
Low-Threshold Incentivized HIV Care for Persons with Substance Use DisordersR03DA042668 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI DOMBROWSKI, JULIA COOK · 2016 to 2017
$309k
NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI027757NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007140NIDA NIH HHS R03 DA042668
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNew approaches are needed to provide care to persons with HIV who do not engage in conventionally organized HIV clinics. The Max Clinic in Seattle, Washington, is a walk-in, incentivized HIV care model located in a public health STD clinic that provides care in collaboration with a comprehensive HIV primary care clinic (the Madison Clinic).

methodsWe compared outcomes in the first 50 patients enrolled in Max Clinic and 100 randomly selected matched Madison Clinic control patients; patients in both groups were virally unsuppressed (viral load [VL] >200 copies/mL) at baseline. The primary outcome was any VL indicating viral suppression (≥1 VL <200 copies/mL) during the 12 months postbaseline. Secondary outcomes were continuous viral suppression (≥2 consecutive suppressed VLs ≥60 days apart) and engagement in care (≥2 medical visits ≥60 days apart). We compared outcomes in the 12 months pre- and postbaseline and used generalized estimating equations to compare changes in Max vs control patients, adjusting for unstable housing, substance use, and psychiatric disorders.

resultsViral suppression improved in both groups pre-to-post (20% to 82% Max patients;

conclusionsThe Max Clinic improved viral suppression among patients with complex medical and social needs.

Indexed as

care deliveryhigh-need patientsHIV care continuumretention in caresubstance use

Identifiers

PMID31341930
PMCPMC6641789

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.