ArticlePloS one2025
Telehealth and in-person HIV care during the COVID-19 pandemic at a large academic medical center in North Carolina.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- "It's a lifeline": perspectives and experiences of health technology use among HIV care providers in rural Florida.AIDS care · 2026Article
- Article
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
backgroundTo maintain HIV care during the COVID-19 pandemic, many HIV clinics across the United States adopted telehealth. However, not everyone participated in telehealth equally. This study assessed the use and disparities in telehealth and in-person HIV care at a large academic medical center in North Carolina (NC) relative to the COVID-19 pandemic.
methodsData from the Duke University Infectious Disease clinic in NC were extracted from electronic health records (EHR), aggregated across persons with HIV (PWH) by calendar month, visit type (in-person vs. telehealth HIV care), and by key sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Variation in HIV care over time was analyzed graphically by age, sex, race and ethnicity, county of residence, and viral load (VL) history.
resultsEHR data from 2,623 PWH receiving care between January 2019 and March 2023 were included. Telehealth use sharply increased in the first months of the pandemic and decreased thereafter. Telehealth use was higher among non-Hispanic Whites compared to People of Color. Most PWH (93%) had a first post-onset-of-the-pandemic (pop) HIV care visit on March 16, 2020 and thereafter. The proportion of telehealth first pop visits peaked in April 2020 with 88% telehealth visits.
conclusionsTelehealth bridged the initial COVID-19 pandemic phase with drastically reduced in-person visit availability, yet it was not equally utilized across race and ethnicity groups. To guide the optimal integration of telehealth in HIV care and promote equitable care in the future, HIV care outcomes need to be closely monitored, and strategies designed to promote access for Communities of Color are needed.
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.