ArticleBMC health services research2020
Estimating the effectiveness of self-help groups on the adoption of secondary preventive measures by people living with HIV in Central America, 2012.
Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- HIV interventions across the care continuum for adolescents in high-burden countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccording to UNAIDS, the HIV epidemic has stabilized. This as a result of increased condom use and greater access to coverage for antiretroviral therapy (ART). In Central America, civil society organizations work with self-help groups (SHGs) organized in conjunction with public health services to implement interventions seeking to increase condom use and ART adherence for people living with HIV (PLH).
methodTo analyze the effectiveness of SHGs in Central America aimed on increasing condom use and ART adherence in PLH, We conducted a cross-sectional study using a questionnaire and a random sample of 3024 intervention group and 1166 control group. Based on propensity scoring and one-to-one matching (with replacement), we formed a comparison group to help estimate the effectiveness of the above-mentioned intervention on two outcome variables (condom use and ART adherence). The internal consistency of the results was tested through weighted least squares (WLS) and instrumental variable (IV) regression.
resultsAlthough bivariate comparisons yielded differences between intervention and control group, we found no evidence that the intervention was effective; nor did we find evidence of a heterogeneous impact among countries after adjusting for propensity scoring and the IV model. The impact observed after performing raw comparisons of the indicators may be attributable to self-selection on the part of PLH rather than to the SHGs strategy. Our results demonstrate that it is imperative to use rigorous intervention evaluation methodology to validate the consistency of results.
conclusionsThe intervention had no impact on the outcome indicators measured. We recommend prioritizing the allocation of economic resources for the implementation of interventions with previously proven effectiveness. We also recommend that future studies explore why the intervention failed to produce the expected impact on condom use and ART adherence.
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.