ArticleBMC public health2026
Interventions for thriving in HIV serodiscordant relationships in Sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHIV serodiscordant relationships, where one partner is HIV-positive and the other is HIV-negative, present unique challenges despite biomedical advances including U = U (Undetectable = Untransmittable). Effective interventions are crucial to support these couples in managing their relationships, promoting treatment adherence, and reducing the risk of HIV transmission. This scoping review aims to identify, map, and evaluate the range of interventions designed to support thriving and the maintenance of healthy relationships among HIV serodiscordant couples.
methodsA comprehensive search strategy was employed across six electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) for literature published between January 2014 and March 2025. The search included explicit terms for all 49 Sub-Saharan African countries. Study selection was guided by the Population, Concept, Context (PCC) framework for scoping reviews. A total of 17 studies met the inclusion criteria.
resultsThe review synthesises interventions into three primary categories: couples-based (n = 11 sources, 65%), community-based (n = 8 sources, 47%), and positive psychology interventions (n = 4 sources, 24%). Key barriers, included internal stigma, gender inequalities, and socio-economic challenges. Key facilitators included comprehensive education, community outreach, and supportive couple dynamics. Geographic distribution was uneven: East Africa (n = 7), Southern Africa (n = 6), West Africa (n = 2), Central Africa (n = 1), and global/multi-regional reviews (n = 4). Most primary studies focused on heterosexual couples (85%), with limited evidence for same-sex couples.
conclusionThe findings accentuate the necessity of multi-component, culturally tailored interventions that integrate biomedical, psychosocial, and structural approaches to improve health outcomes and relationship satisfaction for serodiscordant couples. This synthesis provides a foundation for developing evidence-informed interventions and highlights critical gaps for future research.
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.