ArticleArchives of sexual behavior2026
Evaluating PEACHES: Pleasure-Inclusive Implementation Strategies to Enable Healthcare Workers to Address Anal Sex Stigma During HIV Service Encounters.
Article in Archives of sexual behavior, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Stigma toward anal sex hinders HIV prevention by limiting equitable access to sexual health services. To mitigate this hindrance, we developed a clinician- and community-informed package of anti-stigma implementation strategies using the Behaviour Change Wheel and its Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behaviour (COM-B) Model. The package, "Partnering to Enhance Anal Health Communication and HIV-related Evidence-based Services" (PEACHES 1.0), combined training strategies with quality improvement (QI) strategies. We implemented a pilot evaluation of PEACHES 1.0 among HIV workers in the Southern USA and assessed pre/post-shifts in participants' self-reported proximal outcomes (mechanisms of action like knowledge, comfort, skills) and their frequency of anal sex-specific health promotion. In two clinics that received organization-specific QI meetings, we also assessed patient uptake of anal sex-related HIV services based on aggregated medical record data. We conducted paired t-tests on longitudinal survey responses, thematic analysis of longitudinal in-depth interviews and open-ended survey responses, and non-statistical comparison of rates for patient uptake of services. Post-PEACHES, HIV workers reported 8% to 54% improvements (all p < .01) in proximal outcomes like knowledge, comfort, and skills. Frequency of self-reported anal health promotion increased 15% to 25% (p < .01). Clinics that received QI sessions differed in their QI engagement and had diverging patient uptake of services. Clinic A, with greater QI engagement, saw a 60% increase in anorectal STI screening, and a 28% increase in new PrEP prescriptions; Clinic B, with less engagement, saw 17% and 18% decreases, respectively. Qualitative findings indicated that the QI strategies-placing pleasure-inclusive visual cues linked to a website of informational resources in the clinic environment and clinic-specific QI meetings-enabled workers to destigmatize discussions about anal sex within HIV services. Future research should standardize elements of QI, and evaluate scalability with fidelity as well as the potential impact on client outcomes in a fully-powered hybrid implementation-effectiveness trial.
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.