ArticlePloS one2025
Stakeholders' perspectives on the status of family planning integration into differentiated antiretroviral therapy service delivery models in Uganda: A qualitative assessment.
Article in PloS one, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFacility- and community-based differentiated antiretroviral therapy service delivery models (DSDM) for stable patients can offer a convenient platform for integrating self-care-oriented family planning (FP) services into HIV care. However, little evidence exists on the status of FP integration within self-care-oriented DSDM (SC-DSDM). We explored the status of FP integration into SC-DSDM, stakeholders' perspectives about and barriers to integrating FP into SC-DSDM and suggestions for improving FP integration into SC-DSDM.
methodsThis qualitative study was conducted in 18 purposely-selected health facilities in 17 districts across four high HIV-prevalence regions between September and October 2022. We conducted 36 in-depth interviews with women living with HIV (i.e., clients), receiving ARV drug refills through SC-DSDM, and 47 key informant interviews with selected stakeholders including healthcare providers, district health managers, implementing partner representatives and policymakers. Data were collected on the different forms of FP integration into SC-DSDM; perspectives on integrating FP into SC-DSDM, and barriers to and suggestions for improving FP integration into SC-DSDM. Data were analyzed following a thematic framework approach.
resultsWe found two forms of FP integration into SC-DSDM: a) one-stop center (in which ART and FP services were provided at the same service delivery point) and b) collaboration/referral to another service delivery point. Only four health facilities offered ART and FP services through the one-stop center; the rest of the health facilities referred clients to the maternal and child health/FP clinic or to other health facilities. All categories of stakeholders agreed that the one-stop center is more convenient and less time-consuming since referral to another service delivery point can increase patient waiting time or result in multiple clinic visits if ART and FP services are offered on separate days. Staff shortages, stock-outs of short-term FP supplies, shortage of adequate office space and lack of integrated registers continue to hamper effective integration of FP into SC-DSDM.
conclusionDespite the potential benefits of FP-HIV integration, FP and ART services continue to be offered as stand-alone programs with limited FP integration into SC-DSDM. These findings call for policy guidance from the Ministry of Health in integrating FP into SC-DSDM in Uganda.
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.