Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39493834›Full record

ArticleGlobal qualitative nursing research

Assessing Barriers and Facilitators to Participation in a Nurse-Driven, Opt-Out HIV Screening Program in the Emergency Department.

Jackson M C Montgomery, Alida Bouris, Kimberly A Stanford

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global qualitative nursing research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Jackson M C MontgomeryUniversity of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-7021-4792
Alida BourisUniversity of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Kimberly A StanfordUniversity of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7374-1323

Funding

Implementation of emergency department screening to impact rising syphilis rates in vulnerable populationsK23AI166277 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI STANFORD, KIMBERLY · 2022 to 2025
$820k
NIAID NIH HHS K23 AI166277
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Emergency department (ED) HIV screening is a key component of the strategy to end the HIV epidemic, reaching populations with limited access to care for screening and early diagnosis. Many screening programs rely primarily on participation from ED nurses; however, little is known about the factors affecting nurse participation in screening. Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, 20 semi-structured interviews were conducted with ED nurses to explore perceptions of HIV screening, barriers and facilitators to participation, and implementation insights. Nurses were categorized as either high adopters or low adopters based on the number of HIV tests ordered 3 months prior to interviews. The Stanford Lightning Report Method, a rapid qualitative analysis approach, was used to analyze field notes. All participants generally agreed that the ED was an appropriate location for screening and that frequent, multimodal education about screening was needed. Integration of screening into standard workflows, education about the public health impact of screening, and the use of peer champions and mentors were identified as important strategies to increase participation. By incorporating these findings into implementation strategies, EDs may be able to increase nurse participation in screening, addressing important health equity issues in HIV diagnosis.

Indexed as

access to health careemergency carehealth care screeningHIV/AIDSMidwestern United Statesnursing

Identifiers

PMID39493834
PMCPMC11531000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.