Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38394108›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Measures of retention in HIV care: A protocol for a mixed methods study.

Nadia Rehman, Michael Cristian Garcia, Aaron Jones, Jinhui Ma, Dominik Mertz, Lawrence Mbuagbaw

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Nadia RehmanDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0174-1527
Michael Cristian GarciaTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Aaron JonesDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Jinhui MaDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Dominik MertzDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Lawrence MbuagbawDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5855-5461

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRetention in HIV care is necessary to achieve adherence to antiretroviral therapy, viral load suppression, and optimal health outcomes. There is no standard definition for retention in HIV care, which compromises consistent and reliable reporting and comparison of retention across facilities, jurisdictions, and studies.

objectiveThe objective of this study is to explore how stakeholders involved in HIV care define retention in HIV care and their preferences on measuring retention.

methodsWe will use an exploratory sequential mixed methods design involving HIV stakeholder groups such as people living with HIV, people involved in providing care for PLHIV, and people involved in decision-making about PLHIV. In the qualitative phase of the study, we will conduct 20-25 in-depth interviews to collect the perspectives of HIV stakeholders on using their preferred retention measures. The findings from the qualitative phase will inform the development of survey items for the quantitative phase. Survey participants (n = 385) will be invited to rate the importance of each approach to measuring retention on a seven-point Likert scale. We will merge the qualitative and quantitative findings phase findings to inform a consensus-building framework for a standard definition of retention in care. ETHICAL ISSUES AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received ethics approval from the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board. The findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, and among stakeholder groups. LIMITATIONS: This study has limitations; we won't be able to arrive at a standard definition; a Delphi technique amongst the stakeholders will be utilized using the framework to reach a consensus globally accepted definition.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsResearch DesignConsensusHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesViral Load

Identifiers

PMID38394108
PMCPMC10889855

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.