ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2021
HIV Treatment Outcomes in Rural Georgia Using Telemedicine.
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Brief Report: Availability of Substance Use Services at US HIV Care Facilities by Urbanicity.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2026Article
- Impact of Travel Distance and Transportation Needs on Racial/Ethnic Differences in Achieving Sustained Viral Suppression in Miami-Dade County, 2017.Research square · 2025Article
- Association between virtual visits and health outcomes of people living with HIV: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Equity and use of telehealth modalities among people living with HIV during the COVID-19 pandemic.Digital healthArticle
- Comparison of Premature Cause-Specific Mortality Among People With HIV in Florida Pre-(2019) and Early (2020) COVID-19 Pandemic: Disparities by Race and Ethnicity, Sex, Rurality, and Social Vulnerability.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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe increasing shortage of specialized health care services contributes to the ongoing HIV epidemic. Telemedicine (TM) is a potential tool to improve HIV care, but little is known about its effectiveness when compared with traditional (face-to-face [F2F]) care in rural populations. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of HIV care delivered through TM with the F2F model.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective chart review of a subset of patients with HIV who attended a TM clinic in Dublin, Georgia, and an F2F clinic in Augusta, Georgia, between May 2017 and April 2018. All TM patients were matched to F2F patients based on gender, age, and race. HIV viral load (VL) and CD4 count gain were compared using
resultsThree hundred eighty-five patients were included in the analyses (F2F = 200; TM = 185). The mean CD4 in the TM group was higher (643.9 cells/mm
conclusionsTM was associated with outcome measures comparable to F2F. Increased access to specialty HIV care through TM can facilitate HIV control in communities with limited health care access in the rural United States. Rigorous prospective evaluation of TM for HIV care effectiveness is warranted.
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.