ArticlePatient preference and adherence2025
Developing a Health Education Checklist for Healthcare Professionals to Ensure Treatment Adherence of Newly Diagnosed Young People Living with HIV: A Delphi Study.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Young people living with HIV (YLWH) are a key population in global HIV prevention and control. YLWH often shows poor adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART), with poor medication adherence, delayed initiation and frequent treatment interruption. This study aimed to develop a theory-based health education checklist to support ART adherence among newly diagnosed YLWH. Methods: An initial pool of 41 items was generated through a literature review and the Protection Motivation Theory (PMT) framework, covering ART knowledge, coping strategies, psychosocial support, and behavioral skills. A structured health education checklist was then designed and refined through expert panel discussions and the Delphi method. Between November 2024 and January 2025, 17 experts from seven provinces in China participated in a two-round Delphi consultation. Experts assessed and revised the scientific rigor, importance, and feasibility of the proposed checklist. The expert authority coefficient and Kendall's coefficient of concordance were calculated to evaluate the consistency of expert opinions, leading to the development of a standardized checklist. Results: The final checklist comprises 5 primary indicators, 10 secondary indicators, and 32 tertiary indicators. The expert authority coefficients for the two Delphi rounds were 0.867 and 0.905, respectively, the Kendall's coefficients of concordance were 0.621 and 0.716 ( Conclusion: The health education checklist developed in this study demonstrates high scientific rigor and feasibility. It provides healthcare professionals with a structured tool to guide health education, which may support both short-term and long-term ART adherence among YLWH.
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.