Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38727987›Full record

ArticleAIDS and behavior2024

A Study on Perceptions of Undetectable = Untransmittable Among Gay Men with Human Immunodeficiency Virus in the HIV Community on Twitter in Japan: An Exploratory Qualitative Study Using a Modified Grounded Theory Approach.

Takashi Nakadomari, Miho Iwakuma

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in AIDS and behavior, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Takashi NakadomariDepartment of Medical Communication, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8501, Japan. takashi.nakadomari@gmail.com.
Miho IwakumaDepartment of Medical Communication, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8501, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study explores the perceptions of the Undetectable = Untransmittable (U = U) campaign among gay men with HIV in Japan who are part of the HIV community on Twitter. We conducted detailed semistructured interviews with 12 participants using a modified grounded theory approach. The analysis resulted in 31 concepts, 5 subcategories, 9 categories, and 2 core categories. The relationship between categories and core categories was examined in conjunction with the transcriptions, yielding a comprehensive category map depicting the process of understanding U = U. The three main processes emerged: participants expressed "expectations for improvement," underwent stages of "understanding U = U," and encountered "dilemmas" in forming their opinions. There are two routes to "understanding U = U": Route 1 involved a frictionless understanding of U = U, and Route 2 involved difficulty in understanding the slogan. In both routes, participants experienced the dilemma of "but I still have HIV" and regarding its ease of use. These dilemmas and difficulties in understanding U = U affected their "expectations for improvement." Efforts to promote U = U in Japan must address challenges in public understanding and related dilemmas. This entails reformulating the U = U message in simpler terms, leveraging professional explanations, disseminating it to a broader audience, and incorporating ideas from individuals living with HIV to enhance the message.

Indexed as

Grounded TheoryHIV InfectionsHomosexuality, MaleQualitative ResearchSocial MediaAdultHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInterviews as TopicJapanMaleMiddle AgedSexual and Gender MinoritiesViral LoadGayHIVOnlinePerceptionTwitterUndetectable = Untransmittable

Identifiers

PMID38727987

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.