SynthesisSystematic reviews2024
Psychometric properties of stigma and discrimination measurement tools for persons living with HIV: a systematic review using the COSMIN methodology.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric Evidence for Chronic Stress Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in African American Adults: An Equity-Focused COSMIN Systematic Review.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026Review
- Factors Associated with High Internalized Stigma Among People Living with HIV in Selected Provinces in Vietnam.AIDS and behavior · 2026Article
- The adaptation and psychometric validation of a stigma measure for adults diagnosed with severe vision impairment in rural Mozambique.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- The burden of HIV-related stigma on clinical and quality of life outcomes: results from a systematic literature review.Health psychology and behavioral medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe development of antiretroviral therapy broadly extends the life expectancy of persons living with HIV (PLHIV). However, stigma and discrimination are still great threat to these individuals and the world's public health care system. Accurate and reproducible measures are prerequisites for robust results. Therefore, it is essential to choose an acceptable measure with satisfactory psychometric properties to assess stigma and discrimination. There has been no systematic review of different stigma and discrimination tools in the field of HIV care. Researchers and clinical practitioners do not have a solid reference for selecting stigma and discrimination measurement tools.
methodsWe systematically searched English and Chinese databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycINFO, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, The Cochrane Library, CNKI,, and Wanfang, to obtain literature about stigma and discrimination measurement tools that have been developed and applied in the field of HIV. The search period was from 1st January, 1996 to 22nd November 2021. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guideline (2018 version) was applied to assess the risk of bias for each involved study and summarize the psychometric properties of each tool. The modified version of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and, Evaluation (GRADE) method was used to grade the evidence and develop recommendations.
resultsWe included 45 studies and 19 PROMs for HIV/AIDS-related stigma and discrimination among PLHIV. All studies had sufficient methodological quality in content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, and the hypothesis testing of structural validity. Limited evidence was found for cross-cultural validity, stability, and criterion validity. No relevant evidence was found concerning measurement error and responsiveness. The Internalized AIDS-related Stigma Scale (IARSS), Internalized HIV Stigma Scale (IHSS), and Wright's HIV stigma scale (WHSS) are recommended for use.
conclusionsThis study recommends three PROMs for different stigma and discrimination scenarios, including IARSS for its good quality and convenience, IHSS for its broader range of items, higher sensitivity, and greater precision, and WHSS for its comprehensive and quick screening. Researchers should also consider the relevance and feasibility of the measurements before putting them into practice. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022308579.
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.