Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31608651›Full record

ArticleAIDS research and human retroviruses2020

The Dose Response: Perceptions of People Living with HIV in the United States on Alternatives to Oral Daily Antiretroviral Therapy.

Karine Dubé, Shadi Eskaf, David Evans, John Sauceda, Parya Saberi, Brandon Brown, Dawn Averitt, Krista Martel, Maria Meija, Danielle Campbell and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AIDS research and human retroviruses, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Time to Engage Young People in HIV Cure Research.AIDS research and human retroviruses · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

18 authors.

Karine DubéPublic Health Leadership Program (PHLP), UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Shadi EskafEnvironmental Finance Center, UNC School of Government, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
David EvansDelaney AIDS Research Enterprise (DARE) Community Advisory Board, Los Angeles, California.
John SaucedaDivision of Prevention Sciences, Center for AIDS Prevention Studies (CAPS), University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Parya SaberiDivision of Prevention Sciences, Center for AIDS Prevention Studies (CAPS), University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Brandon BrownDepartment of Social Medicine, Population and Public Health, Center for Healthy Communities, University of California, Riverside School of Medicine, Riverside, California.
Dawn AverittWomen's Research Initiative on HIV/AIDS (WRI), Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Krista MartelWomen's Research Initiative on HIV/AIDS (WRI), Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Maria MeijaThe Well Project Community Advisory Board, Tamarac, Florida.
Danielle CampbellDelaney AIDS Research Enterprise (DARE) Community Advisory Board, Los Angeles, California.
Liz BarrAIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) Community Scientific Subcommittee Representative, Baltimore, Maryland.
John KanazawaPublic Health Leadership Program (PHLP), UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Kelly PerryPublic Health Leadership Program (PHLP), UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Hursch PatelPublic Health Leadership Program (PHLP), UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Stuart LuterPublic Health Leadership Program (PHLP), UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Tonia PoteatWomen's Research Initiative on HIV/AIDS (WRI), Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Judith D AuerbachWomen's Research Initiative on HIV/AIDS (WRI), Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
David A WohlInstitute of Global Health and Infectious Diseases (IGHID), University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

Funding

Ujima Mentoring ProgramP30MH062246 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI MALLORY O JOHNSON · 2001 to 2026
$57.4M
TRAINEESHIPS IN AIDS PREVENTION STUDIEST32MH019105 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Carol Suzanne Camlin, Glenn-Milo Santos · 1989 to 2026
$15.3M
Pilot Integration of Participant-Centered Outcomes in HIV Cure Research in the United States: Implications for Ethical ConductR21MH118120 · NIMH · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI DUBE, KARINE · 2019 to 2020
$566k
Perceptions of Risks and Benefits of Participating in HIV Cure-related Research among Diverse Youth and Young Adults Living with HIV in the United StatesR21MH122280 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI DUBE, KARINE, SABERI, PARYA · 2020 to 2021
$458k
NIMH NIH HHS P30 MH062246NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH118120NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH122280NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH019105
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are two concurrent and novel major research pathways toward strategies for HIV control: (1) long-acting antiretroviral therapy (ART) formulations and (2) research aimed at conferring sustained ART-free HIV remission, considered a step toward an HIV cure. The importance of perspectives from people living with HIV on the development of new modalities is high, but data are lacking. We administered an online survey in which respondents selected their likelihood of participation or nonparticipation in HIV cure/remission research based on potential risks and perceived benefits of these new modalities. We also tested the correlation between perceptions of potential risks and benefits with preferences of virologic control strategies and/or responses to scenario choices, while controlling for respondent characteristics. Of the 282 eligible respondents, 42% would be willing to switch from oral daily ART to long-acting ART injectables or implantables taken at 6-month intervals, and 24% to a hypothetical ART-free remission strategy. We found statistically significant gender differences in perceptions of risk and preferences of HIV control strategies, and possible psychosocial factors that could mediate willingness to switch to novel HIV treatment or remission options. Our study yielded data on possible desirable product characteristics for future HIV treatment and remission options. Findings also revealed differences in motivations and preferences across gender and other sociodemographic characteristics that may be actionable as part of research recruitment efforts. The diversity of participant perspectives reveals the need to provide a variety of therapeutic options to people living with HIV and to acknowledge their diverse experiential expertise when developing novel HIV therapies.

Indexed as

Surveys and QuestionnairesAdultAgedAnti-Retroviral AgentsDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug TherapyFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient ParticipationQualitative ResearchUnited StatesYoung AdultAnti-Retroviral Agentsantiretroviral therapy (ART)HIV cure researchHIV remissionlong-acting ARToral daily ARTpeople living with HIVUnited States

Identifiers

PMID31608651
PMCPMC7185332

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.