Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32881790›Full record

ArticleAIDS (London, England)2020

The People Living with HIV Stigma Index 2.0: generating critical evidence for change worldwide.

Barbara A Friedland, Ann Gottert, Julian Hows, Stefan D Baral, Laurel Sprague, Laura Nyblade, Tracy L McClair, Florence Anam, Scott Geibel, Stella Kentutsi and 6 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in AIDS (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing 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

47 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

16 authors.

Barbara A FriedlandPopulation Council, HIV and AIDS Program, Center for Biomedical Research, New York, New York.
Ann GottertPopulation Council, HIV and AIDS Program, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Julian HowsD.R.A.G: Development Research Advocacy Governance, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Stefan D BaralDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.
Laurel SpragueUNAIDS, Geneva, Switzerland.
Laura NybladeRTI International, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Tracy L McClairPopulation Council, HIV and AIDS Program, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Florence AnamDoctors Without Borders (MSF) Southern Africa, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Scott GeibelPopulation Council, HIV and AIDS Program, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Stella KentutsiNational Forum of PLHIV Networks in Uganda (NAFOPHANU), Kampala, Uganda.
Ubald TamoufeMetabiota, Yaoundé, Cameroon.
Daouda DiofEndaSanté, Dakar, Senegal.
Ugo AmenyeiwePrevention, Care and Treatment (PCT) Division, USAID, Office of HIV/AIDS, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Christoforos MallourisUNAIDS, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Julie PulerwitzPopulation Council, HIV and AIDS Program, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
PLHIV Stigma Index 2.0 Study Group

Funding

Validation of Stigma Metrics for Marginalized Men R01MH110358 · NIMH · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI BARAL, STEFAN DAVID · 2017 to 2021
$3.6M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH110358
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

OBJECTIVE(S): To describe the process of updating the People Living with HIV (PLHIV) Stigma Index (Stigma Index) to reflect current global treatment guidelines and to better measure intersecting stigmas and resilience.

designThrough an iterative process driven by PLHIV, the Stigma Index was revised, pretested, and formally evaluated in three cross-sectional studies.

methodsBetween March and October 2017, 1153 surveys (n = 377, Cameroon; n = 390, Senegal; n = 391, Uganda) were conducted with PLHIV at least 18 years old who had known their status for at least 1 year. PLHIV interviewers administered the survey on tablet computers or mobile phones to a diverse group of purposively sampled respondents recruited through PLHIV networks, community-based organizations, HIV clinics, and snowball sampling. Sixty respondents participated in cognitive interviews (20 per country) to assess if questions were understood as intended, and eight focus groups (Uganda only) assessed relevance of the survey, overall.

resultsThe Stigma Index 2.0 performed well and was relevant to PLHIV in all three countries. HIV-related stigma was experienced by more than one-third of respondents, including in HIV care settings. High rates of stigma experienced by key populations (such as MSM and sex workers) impeded access to HIV services. Many PLHIV also demonstrated resilience per the new PLHIV Resilience Scale.

conclusionThe Stigma Index 2.0 is now more relevant to the current context of the HIV/AIDS epidemic and response. Results will be critical for addressing gaps in program design and policies that must be overcome to support PLHIV engaging in services, adhering to antiretroviral therapy, being virally suppressed, and leading healthy, stigma-free lives.

Indexed as

Resilience, PsychologicalSocial StigmaAdolescentAdultCameroonCross-Sectional StudiesHealth Services AccessibilityHIV InfectionsHomosexuality, MaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedPsychometricsQualitative ResearchReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID32881790
PMCPMC11758485

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.