Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36649350›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

One size does not fit all: Preferences for HIV care delivery among out-of-care people living with HIV in the Southeastern United States.

Marxavian D Jones, Kelly Dyer, Emma R Nedell, Michelle R Fletcher, Cassie Grimsley Ackerley, Sophia A Hussen, Ameeta S Kalokhe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors.

Marxavian D JonesHubert Department of Global Health, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.
Kelly DyerDivision of Infectious Diseases, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.
Emma R NedellHubert Department of Global Health, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-2399-8662
Michelle R FletcherHubert Department of Global Health, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.
Cassie Grimsley AckerleyDivision of Infectious Diseases, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.
Sophia A HussenHubert Department of Global Health, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.
Ameeta S KalokheHubert Department of Global Health, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-3556-1786

Funding

Virology and Molecular Biomarkers CoreP30AI050409 · NIAID · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Carlos del Rio · 2002 to 2026
$74.0M
NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI050409
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Approximately half of the people with HIV (PWH) in the United States are retained in HIV care and only 57% have achieved viral suppression, due to barriers including transportation access, stigma, poor mental health, substance use, and medical mistrust. Community-based HIV care models have potential to address the diverse needs of patients and to improve retention in care, but their success is contingent on acceptance by patients and key community stakeholders. Recognizing that the preferences of PWH who are out-of-care (PWH-OOC) likely differ from those retained in care, we conducted a mixed-methods study from June 2019 to May 2021 composed of surveys with PWH-OOC (n = 50) and in-depth interviews with key clinic and community stakeholders (n = 41) to examine the relative preference and perceived advantages and disadvantages for six different community-based HIV care models versus the traditional fixed-clinic model. Survey data was analyzed to assess average rank preference for each care model and interview transcripts were thematically coded to examine factors influencing model acceptance. The highest preference for care delivery was via a mobile clinic, followed by community-based peer navigation, primary care clinics, telemedicine, traditional HIV subspeciality clinic, homeless shelter, and drug treatment center. Common factors influencing preference included convenience, accessibility, potential to preserve confidentiality, quality of care assurance, opportunity to develop rapport with their HIV care provider, access to a smart device, and potential to alleviate versus exacerbate HIV stigma. Participants discussed need for integration of care models and for individuals to choose different care models at different times. Providers and patients differed in preference for care model and weighting of relative advantages and disadvantages of each. Findings highlight the need to integrate alternative, community-based care models into the national plan to end the HIV epidemic and to allow for PWH-OOC to choose the model most fitting based on individual circumstances.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsTelemedicineHealth Services AccessibilityHumansSoutheastern United StatesTrustUnited States

Identifiers

PMID36649350
PMCPMC9844861

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.