ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2025
Systemic inequities, dignity, and trust in the context of HIV care: a qualitative analysis.
Article in International journal for equity in health, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Adherence and retention in care are key targets to achieve favorable health outcomes for people with HIV. Challenges with adherence and retention are pronounced for marginalized communities facing intersectional structural oppression. Community health worker delivery of Managed Problem Solving (MAPS+), an evidence-based behavioral intervention, has the potential to improve adherence and retention, yet understanding structural inequities affecting people with HIV is necessary to increase the likelihood of equitable implementation. The current study explores systemic inequities influencing HIV care adherence and retention, and approaches to address these challenges. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 13 clinics and 4 constituent groups: prescribing clinicians, non-prescribing clinical team members (e.g., medical case managers), clinic administrators, and policymakers. Through reflexive thematic analysis within a constructionist paradigm, we identified two key themes. The first elucidated experiences of systemic inequities such as access to resources, healthcare system navigation difficulties, power differentials, medical mistrust, intersectional stigma and potential patient burden associated with MAPS+. The second theme highlighted the ways in which staff and clinicians shoulder the burden of addressing inequities by approaching people with HIV with dignity and developing trusting relationships and how MAPS + can bolster this approach by partnering with and centering patient needs. While these individual and organizational efforts are valuable, ending the HIV epidemic requires structural changes to address systemic inequities directly. This research underscores the complex interplay between structural oppression and HIV care, calling for comprehensive approaches to achieve health equity.
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.