ArticlePloS one2021
Barriers and facilitators to use of a mobile HIV care model to re-engage and retain out-of-care people living with HIV in Atlanta, Georgia.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trends in HIV Viral Suppression in the POP-UP Low-Barrier Care Program for People With HIV Experiencing Homelessness or Unstable Housing.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Positive Peers Mobile App for Supporting the Viral Suppression of Young People With HIV: Protocol for a Concurrent Mixed Methods Evaluation With Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial and Observational Cohort.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Acceptability, Facilitators, and Barriers of Long-Acting Injectable Cabotegravir/Rilpivirine Among Youth With HIV in the United States.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2025Article
- POP-UP Mobile: A Mixed Methods Study of Mobile Outreach for People with HIV with Housing Instability Who Are Out of Care from a Low-Barrier Clinical Program in San Francisco.AIDS patient care and STDs · 2025Article
- Clinic-level complexities prevent effective engagement of people living with HIV who are out-of-care.PloS one · 2024Article
- Can Community Health Workers in Miami Disrupt Disparities among Black People Living with HIV: A Qualitative Analysis.The open AIDS journal · 2024Article
- Rapid qualitative analysis approach to stakeholder and client interviews to inform mobile-based HIV testing in the U.S. Deep South.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2023Article
- Reaching and Re-Engaging People Living with HIV Who Are Out of Care: A Mixed-Methods Exploration of Patient Preferences for Strategies to Enhance Clinic Communication and Outreach.AIDS patient care and STDs · 2023Article
- Using the Positive Peers Mobile App to Improve Clinical Outcomes for Young People With HIV: Prospective Observational Cohort Comparison.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Observational
- Challenges and opportunities of telehealth digital equity to manage HIV and comorbidities for older persons living with HIV in New York State.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Understanding and addressing privacy and confidentiality concerns associated with the provision of mobile HIV care: a qualitative study.AIDS care · 2022Article
- Co-Utilization of HIV, Substance Use, Mental Health Services Among Women With Current Substance Use: Opportunities for Integrated Care?Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Novel strategies to re-engage and retain people living with HIV (PLWH) who are out of care are greatly needed. While mobile clinics have been used effectively for HIV testing and linkage, evidence guiding their use in providing HIV care domestically has been limited. To guide the development of a mobile HIV clinic (MHC) model as a strategy to re-engage and retain PLWH who are out of care, we aimed to explore stakeholder perceptions of barriers and facilitators to MHC implementation and use. From June 2019-July 2020, we conducted 41 in-depth interviews with HIV clinic providers, administrators, staff, legal authorities, and community advisory board members, PLWH, AIDS service organizations and city officials in Atlanta, Georgia, and domestic and international mobile health clinics to explore barriers and facilitators to use of MHCs. Interviews were transcribed, coded and thematically analysed. Barriers raised include potential for: breach of confidentiality with resulting heightened stigmatization, fractured continuity of care, safety concerns, staffing challenges, and low community acceptance of MHC presence in their locality. Participants provided suggestions regarding appropriate exterior design, location, timing, and co-delivery of non-HIV services that could facilitate MHC acceptance and address the concerns. In identifying key barriers and facilitators to MHC use, this study informs design and implementation of an MHC as a novel strategy for re-engaging and retaining PLWH who are out of care.
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.