Trial reportAIDS and behavior2025
Strategies to Facilitate Service Utilization Among Youth at Risk for HIV: A Randomized Controlled Trial (ATN 149).
Trial report in AIDS and behavior, 2025. 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sexual and gender minority youth (SGMY) are vulnerable to acquiring HIV and need HIV prevention and health services, but may have competing needs. A prior analysis found that PrEP use reports increased in a combination intervention study arm with coaching, peer support, and automated text-messages. This paper examines ancillary support and healthcare services utilization as secondary intervention objectives. SGMY (N = 895, 40% Black, 29% Latino) in Los Angeles and New Orleans were recruited from May, 2017 to August, 2019 and randomized to four intervention conditions: (a) automated text-messaging and monitoring intervention (AMMI), (b) AMMI plus peer support online (AMMI+PS), (c) AMMI plus strengths-based coaching by near-peer paraprofessionals (AMMI+C), or (d) all three (AMMI+PS+C). Intent-to-treat multivariate regression analyses evaluated the interventions' efficacy on past 4-month reports of ancillary support services use, having a regular healthcare provider, receiving care from doctor's office or clinic and mental health specialists, and participation in mental health support groups and HIV prevention programs. Ancillary services utilization reports declined from 40% of youth reporting an average of 4.4 services at baseline to 22.6% reporting 2.5 services by 24 months. Food, housing, transportation, and other basic services were utilized most frequently. Youth in the two coaching interventions maintained higher reports of services use over time compared to AMMI-only (both OR 1.23, 95%CI 1.12-1.35) and to AMMI+PS (both OR 1.20 95%CI 1.08-1.33). Our coaching intervention may support SGMY to stay engaged in support services. Results may be limited by self-report biases. It is unclear if these services are related to better long-term outcomes.
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.