ArticleAIDS and behavior2025
Initial and Subsequent Engagement of Recently Diagnosed Persons Living with HIV in Contact Tracing Interviews Conducted by Public Health Practitioners.
Article 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Contact tracing is effective in disrupting HIV transmission, but may be limited by the reluctance or inability of recently HIV-diagnosed persons (RDPs) to engage collaboratively with public health. Leveraging an ongoing study endeavoring to increase the yield of standard-of-care contact tracing by re-interviewing a subset of RDPs, we assessed RDP engagement during first and second interviews and compared the two. We used Likert scale scores to develop and employ a 35-point index tool, to assess engagement during first interviews (standard of care) and second interviews (executed in a parent study to inform RDPs of clustering in an attempt to identify additional contacts). Cronbach's Alpha was used to assess the internal consistency of the index, and differences between the index scores of paired (first vs. second) interviews were assessed using paired Student's t-tests. Between January/2021 and December/2022, first interviews were performed with 120 RDPs, and second interviews with 20 of the 120 RDPs. The index was simple to use and internally consistent (Alpha = 0.93). Higher engagement was observed in first interviews (~ 30/35, soon after diagnosis) and lower engagement in second interviews (~ 22/35, usually several weeks later) (P < 0.01). Using a novel engagement tool, we observed diminished engagement between first and second contact tracing interviews, suggesting the limits of RDPs' collaboration with public health praxis. The simple, reliable, and informative engagement index we developed and tested may be used in the future to explore interactions between RDPs and public health practitioners.
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.