ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2025
Addressing digital exclusion to improve access to HIV and viral hepatitis care for people who experience criminalization: a mixed methods evaluation of a quality improvement project.
Article in International journal for equity in health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeople who experience criminalization, such as those who use drugs, are incarcerated, and are affected by homelessness, have a high prevalence of HIV and/or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and low treatment uptake in British Columbia. Barriers to care include unreliable means of maintaining contact with healthcare providers. To reduce these barriers, the Test, Link, Call (TLC) Project provides cell phones and peer health mentors to support access to HIV and/or HCV care. This study aims to determine the outcomes and acceptability of TLC and its impact on care engagement.
methodsA mixed-methods evaluation was conducted over the first 29 months (October 2021–March 2024) of the TLC Project. Data were collected concurrently in two rounds: the first after one year and the second two years after launch. Qualitative data were collected using semi-structured interviews conducted with healthcare providers (n = 8), peer health mentors (n = 6), and program participants (n = 20). Quantitative data, including demographic and clinical information, were gathered through program records and cross-sectional clinical chart reviews. Factors associated with HCV treatment uptake were assessed among HCV RNA positive participants (n = 245) using multivariate logistic regression. Data from both rounds were integrated for comprehensive analysis.
results273 participants were enrolled in HCV care, and 26 in HIV care. Interviewees found TLC highly acceptable and effective. Positive outcomes included increased access to health and social services, connection to loved ones, independence, and safety. Challenges included phone theft and digital literacy issues. Overall, 57% of TLC participants enrolled for HCV care initiated curative treatment, compared to 40% among people who currently inject drugs in the provincial administrative database in 2020. The multivariate logistic regression analysis suggested that gender, housing stability, safer supply prescriptions, and length of involvement in the TLC program are predictive factors influencing treatment initiation.
conclusionsThe provision of cell phones and peer health mentors effectively increased engagement in HIV and HCV care, demonstrating substantial benefits despite some challenges. This cost-effective intervention could be expanded to support people who experience criminalization in other geographic locations and addressing other health conditions, such as syphilis and substance use disorder.
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.