Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33351805›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Development and initial validation of a simple tool to screen for partner support or opposition to HIV prevention product use.

Elizabeth E Tolley, Seth Zissette, Andres Martinez, Thesla Palanee-Phillips, Florence Mathebula, Siyanda Tenza, Miriam Hartmann, Elizabeth T Montgomery

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Elizabeth E TolleyBehavioral, Epidemiological & Clinical Sciences, FHI 360, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9823-3675
Seth ZissetteBehavioral, Epidemiological & Clinical Sciences, FHI 360, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Andres MartinezBehavioral, Epidemiological & Clinical Sciences, FHI 360, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Thesla Palanee-PhillipsWits Reproductive Health and HIV Institute, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Florence MathebulaWits Reproductive Health and HIV Institute, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Siyanda TenzaWits Reproductive Health and HIV Institute, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Miriam HartmannWomen's Global Health Imperative, RTI International, San Francisco Project Office, California, United States of America.
Elizabeth T MontgomeryWomen's Global Health Imperative, RTI International, San Francisco Project Office, California, United States of America.
University of the Witwatersrand · ZAFamily Health International 360 · USRTI International · USUniversity of Notre Dame · US

Funding

PEPFAR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In HIV prevention trials, male partners have influenced women's ability to adhere to investigational products, including antiretroviral (ARV) containing vaginal rings. Validated scales can be useful tools to systematically measure complex constructs, such as those related to male partner engagement. Although multiple scales exist to assess physical, psychological and sexual violence within intimate relationships, fewer scales focus on supportive behaviors within these relationships. Our intervention involved development of a Healthy Relationship Assessment Tool (HEART) that assessed both positive and negative aspects of male partner involvement in women's HIV prevention. We identified and refined 127 potential items, representing intimate partner violence, agency and social support. A structured survey, including potential items and other sociodemographic and behavioral variables was administered to former microbicide trial and non-trial participants. We conducted an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to identify a reduced set of constructs and items to screen women who might experience social harms or benefits from vaginal ring use. We examined associations between constructs and with other survey variables to assess content and construct validity. In a subset of 10 women who participated in the survey and qualitative interviews, we used qualitative data to predict survey scores. We retained five constructs with theoretical relevance and good-to-strong reliability for the tool, including: Traditional Values; Partner Support; Partner Abuse & Control; Partner Resistance to HIV Prevention; and HIV Prevention Readiness. Predicted associations between HEART constructs, and correspondence between participants' qualitative data and HEART scores were generally correct, while those between constructs and other sociodemographic variables were more mixed. Initial validation of the HEART tool was promising. The tool will be used during the CHARISMA pilot study at the Johannesburg MTN 025/HOPE site and validated as part of a randomized controlled trial of CHARISMA within a PrEP demonstration project. Beyond clinical trial settings, HEART could assist PrEP or antiretroviral treatment (ART) providers with an easy-to-administer tool to identify risk and tailor risk reduction, empowerment and adherence counseling for microbicides, PrEP or ART related services.

Indexed as

Social SupportAdultFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMaleSexual PartnersSpouse AbuseSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID33351805
PMCPMC7755213
OpenAlexW3114923929

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.