ArticleImplementation science communications2025
The peer paradox: Perspectives from HIV service providers to inform the implementation of an enhanced social network strategy for black sexual and gender minorities-a qualitative study.
Article in Implementation science communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Digital health promotion strategies to increase HIV testing uptake among key populations: a scoping review.Cadernos de saude publica · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe CDC's Social Network Strategy (SNS) is an evidence-supported approach to increase reach for HIV testing among members of marginalized populations. Leveraging social networks could improve access to HIV services, like pre-exposure prophylaxis and antiretroviral therapy, particularly for members of Black sexual and gender minority (BSGM) groups. We explored key barriers and facilitators prior to implementing an enhanced SNS (eSNS) to increase access to a broader range of HIV prevention and treatment services among BSGM in an Ending the HIV Epidemic jurisdiction in the US South.
methodsGuided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we conducted four focus groups with 19 HIV services staff members and 12 in-depth interviews with local health department officials, clinicians, and community-based organization leaders pre-implementation. Transcripts were coded by applying constructs from the CFIR and we identified themes about potential barriers and facilitators to implementing eSNS from potential implementers.
resultsWe identified three themes, each of which reflect a delicate and paradoxical balance between trust and mistrust that operates within social networks. Each theme represents a "Peer Paradox", wherein eSNS core components may have unpredictable effects on trust and mistrust within peer networks. The Incentives Paradox captures how financial incentives work synergistically with interpersonal ties to strengthen engagement with HIV services but also introduces a transactional element into peer-to-peer interactions. The Readiness Paradox is the perception that BSGM individuals best positioned to recruit peers who could most benefit from HIV services may require the greatest amount of additional support in delivering eSNS. The Credibility Paradox reflects a concern that although trust among peers may be harnessed to disseminate health information and increase acceptance of HIV services, peers may not be considered credible sources of HIV information.
conclusionsDisruptions to the interplay of trust and mistrust within peer networks may influence the effectiveness of the eSNS intervention. These findings suggest that public health practitioners implementing SNS or similar social networking interventions should identify and address specific obstacles to fostering trust before and during implementation. We recommend considering strategies that address peer credibility, readiness, and the impact of financial incentives in social network interventions.
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.