ArticleAIDS and behavior2024
Concordance of HIV Prevention Advocacy Reports and its Associations with HIV Protective Behaviors.
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.
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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Peer advocacy can promote HIV protective behaviors, but little is known about the concordance on prevention advocacy(PA) reports between people living with HIV(PLWH) and their social network members. We examined prevalence and correlates of such concordance, and its association with the targeted HIV protective behavior of the social network member. Data were analyzed from 193 PLWH(index participants) and their 599 social network members(alters). Kappa statistics measured concordance between index and alter reports of PA in the past 3 months. Logistic and multinomial regressions evaluated the relationship between advocacy concordance and alter condom use and HIV testing behavior and correlates of PA concordance. Advocacy concordance was observed in 0.3% of index-alter dyads for PrEP discussion, 9% for condom use, 18% for HIV testing, 26% for care engagement, and 49% for antiretroviral use discussions. Fewer indexes reported condom use(23.5% vs. 28.1%;[Formula: see text]=3.7, p=0.05) and HIV testing(30.5% vs. 50.5%; [Formula: see text]=25.3, p<0.001) PA occurring. Condom advocacy concordance was higher if the index and alter were romantic partners(OR=3.50; p=0.02), and lower if the index was 10 years younger than the alter(OR=0.23; p = 0.02). Alters had higher odds of using condoms with their main partner when both reported condom advocacy compared to dyads where neither reported advocacy(OR=3.90; p<0.001) and compared to dyads where only the index reported such advocacy(OR = 3.71; p=0.01). Age difference and relationship status impact advocacy agreement, and concordant perceptions of advocacy are linked to increased HIV protective behaviors. Alters' perceptions may be crucial for behavior change, informing strategies for improving advocacy.
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.