ArticleBMJ open2022
Nurses' clinical practices reducing the impact of HIV-related stigmatisation in non-HIV-specialised healthcare settings: a protocol for a realist synthesis.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDespite tremendous progress in care, people living with HIV (PLHIV) continue to experience HIV-related stigmatisation by nurses in non-HIV-specialised healthcare settings. This has consequences for the health of PLHIV and the spread of the virus. In the province of Quebec (Canada), only four interventions aimed at reducing the impact of HIV-related stigmatisation by nurses have been implemented since the beginning of the HIV pandemic. While mentoring and persuasion could be promising strategies, expression of fears of HIV could have deleterious effects on nurses' attitudes towards PLHIV. In literature reviews on stigma reduction interventions, the contextual elements in which these interventions have been implemented is not considered. In order to develop new interventions, we need to understand how the mechanisms (M) by which interventions (I) interact with contexts (C) produce their outcomes (O). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Realist synthesis (RS) was selected to formulate a programme theory that will rely on CIMO configuration to describe (1) nursing practices that may influence stigmatisation experiences by PLHIV in non-HIV-specialised healthcare settings, and (2) interventions that may promote the adoption of such practices by nurses. The RS will draw on the steps recommended by Pawson: clarify the scope of the review; search for evidence; appraise primary studies and extract data; synthesise evidence and draw conclusions. To allow an acute interpretation of the disparities between HIV-related stigmatisation experiences depending on people's serological status, an initial version of the programme theory will be formulated from data gathered from scientific and grey literature, and then consolidated through realist interviews with various stakeholders (PLHIV, nurses, community workers and researchers). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for realist interviews will be sought following the initial programme theory design. We intend to share the final programme theory with intervention developers via scientific publications and recommendations to community organisations that counter HIV-related stigmatisation.
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.