Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33598311›Full record

ArticleJournal of virus eradication2021

Motivations, barriers and experiences of participants in an HIV reservoir trial.

Marie-Angélique De Scheerder, Ward P H van Bilsen, Melissa Dullaers, Javier Martinez-Picado, Udi Davidovich, Linos Vandekerckhove

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of virus eradication, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Marie-Angélique De ScheerderDepartment of General Internal Medicine, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent, Belgium.
Ward P H van BilsenDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Melissa DullaersDepartment of Immuno-Oncology, Ablynx, Ghent, Belgium.
Javier Martinez-PicadoIRSICaixa AIDS Research Institute, Badalona, Spain.
Udi DavidovichDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Linos VandekerckhoveDepartment of General Internal Medicine, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent, Belgium.
GGD Amsterdam · NLGhent University Hospital · BEAblynx (Belgium) · BEUniversitat de Vic - Universitat Central de Catalunya · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe aimed to investigate the motives, barriers and experiences of HIV-STAR study participants. The HIV-STAR study was an analytical HIV treatment interruption trial (ATI) aiming to evaluate the origin of viral rebound, conducted in Ghent, Belgium.

methodsA mixed-method study was performed among 11 participants of the HIV-STAR study. Two self-administered questionnaires with 32 and 23 items, respectively, assessed motives, barriers and experiences of the research participants. In-depth interviews were conducted to further explore and understand topics that had emerged from these surveys.

resultsMotives of ATI study participants were primarily related to the improvement of their own health perspectives and to their contribution to find an HIV cure. Barriers for ATI participation mostly related to practical issues, such as difficulty in planning study visits. Ten out of 11 participants reported a very high overall satisfaction and were willing to participate in another ATI. This satisfaction was predominantly linked to clear communication and guidance. Invasive sampling during the ATI was less of a burden than anticipated by participants. However, most participants underestimated the emotional impact of HIV treatment interruption, which was associated with feelings of uncertainty and loss of control. Risk of HIV transmission because of viral rebound was also mentioned as burdensome during this phase.

conclusionsInvolvement in an ATI was positively evaluated by HIV-STAR participants. Contributing to HIV cure research outweighed the burden of study participation for most participants. The latter aspects were attenuated by mutual decision making and the experience of empathy from the research team. Still, issues regarding privacy and the psychosocial impact of treatment interruption, including sexuality and HIV transmissibility, should be addressed in a better way.

Indexed as

Analytical treatment interruptionBarriersExperiencesHIV reservoirMotivationParticipant’ satisfactionTrial participation

Identifiers

PMID33598311
PMCPMC7868726
OpenAlexW3125465550

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.