Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40988425›Full record

ArticleAIDS care2025

Patient preferences for violence screening in HIV care settings.

Ameeta S Kalokhe, Katherine M Anderson, Madelyn S Carlson, Celeste K Ellison, Sophia C Garbarino, Selaem Hadera, Caroline W Kokubun, Eve Rose, Jessica M Sales

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AIDS care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Ameeta S KalokheDivision of Infectious Diseases, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Katherine M AndersonDepartment of Behavioral, Social, and Health Education Sciences, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Madelyn S CarlsonDepartment of Behavioral, Social, and Health Education Sciences, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Celeste K EllisonDepartment of Behavioral, Social, and Health Education Sciences, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Sophia C GarbarinoDepartment of Behavioral, Social, and Health Education Sciences, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Selaem HaderaDepartment of Behavioral, Social, and Health Education Sciences, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Caroline W KokubunDepartment of Behavioral, Social, and Health Education Sciences, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Eve RoseDepartment of Epidemiology, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Jessica M SalesDepartment of Behavioral, Social, and Health Education Sciences, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Funding

An implementation science study of violence screening practices among Ryan White-funded sites in the Southeastern United StatesR01MH121962 · NIMH · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI KALOKHE, AMEETA SHIVDAS, SALES, JESSICA A · 2020 to 2024
$3.3M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH121962
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Experiences of interpersonal- and community-level violence are common among people with HIV (PWH) and associated with poor health outcomes, underscoring a need to implement violence screening and support in HIV care. To inform this implementation, we explored preferences of PWH regarding integration of violence screening into HIV care. From February-December 2022, 64 in-depth interviews were conducted with PWH in Atlanta, Georgia as part of a larger mixed-methods study. Participants were purposively selected for diversity of gender, race/ethnicity, violence exposure history, HIV viral suppression, and retention in care. Themes explored included acceptability of violence screening in HIV care and preferences for doing so (in-person, paper-pencil, computerized), screening item phrasing, screening environment (by whom, where), timing of initial screen, and screening frequency. Violence screening in HIV care was highly acceptable and desirable. Collectively, preference was voiced for initiating screening at first HIV care visit and conducting screening regularly thereafter, in-person, by healthcare providers in a trauma-informed, conversational manner, with supplementation by telehealth or computerized comprehensive screeners to accommodate a variety of needs. This study, the first to detail preferences of PWH across gender and retention/viral suppression status, fills a key gap in evidence informing violence screening recommendations in national HIV care guidelines.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsMass ScreeningPatient PreferenceViolenceAdultFemaleGeorgiaHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchHIVHIV careSDG3: Good health and well-beingtraumaViolence

Identifiers

PMID40988425
PMCPMC12701307

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.