ArticlePloS one2026
Factor structure and psychometric properties of an adapted HIV stigma tool for measuring disability-related stigma among smallholder farmers in Western Kenya - Findings from a cross-sectional study.
Article in PloS one, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeople with disabilities face stigma and discrimination which contribute to barriers and poor outcomes in many areas such as health or employment. There is currently a dearth of tools for measuring disability-related stigma and discrimination in low-and middle-income countries.
aimsThis study aims to evaluate the construct validity and internal consistency of adapted human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) stigma and discrimination tools for use in the context of disability, among smallholder farmers in Western Kenya.
methodsSeparate tools were used to measure enacted stigma in the community among people without disabilities, and stigma experienced by people with disabilities. We split the relevant sample in two (N = 3642 for enacted stigma; N = 710 for experienced stigma), using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) on the first half and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the second.
resultsFor enacted stigma, a two factor-structure was identified: negative attitudes towards people with disabilities and positive/supportive attitudes towards people with disabilities. For experienced stigma, the scale was reduced to six items capturing interpersonal stigma, and was unidimensional. CFA model-fit indices were good. McDonald's omega coefficient indicated good internal consistency for the enacted stigma scale (0.79) and for the experienced stigma scale (0.82).
conclusionThe adapted HIV stigma scale showed good properties in terms of construct validity and reliability, for measuring aspects of disability-related stigma. These are promising results to build on to develop locally valid and standardised disability-related stigma and discrimination measurement tools.
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.