ArticlePatient preference and adherence2026
Identifying Key Intervention Attributes Driving Acceptability of Spouse/Partner-Centered HIV Interventions in Vietnam Using Conjoint Analysis.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: HIV care increasingly addresses the psychosocial challenges faced by people living with HIV. Spouse/partner-centered interventions have shown benefits for women living with HIV (WLWH) globally. However, evidence from Vietnam - a strongly family-oriented context - remains limited. Conjoint analysis (CA) is a method for assessing intervention acceptability by examining how specific intervention attributes influence respondents' willingness to engage. This study uses CA to identify key attributes driving acceptability of spouse/partner-centered interventions among Vietnamese WLWH and their partners, and to explore associations between participant characteristics and individual-level attribute impact scores. Methods: Fifty WLWH and thirty male partners completed an anonymous REDCap survey rating six hypothetical spouse/partner-centered intervention scenarios varying in key attributes (including format, duration, spouse/partner involvement, session type, facilitator, and targeted outcomes). Willingness to participate in each intervention was rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Mixed-effects ordered logistic regression was applied to assess the likelihood of participation. Exploratory Spearman correlation analyses explored associations between participant characteristics and individual-level attribute impact scores. Results: In the full-sample analysis, session type had the strongest impact on the likelihood of participation (impact score = -1.65; p = 0.029), followed by spouse/partner involvement (impact score = 0.99; p = 0.022), intervention duration (impact score = 0.94; p = 0.003), and facilitator type (impact score = 0.89; p = 0.039). Exploratory analyses found no significant associations between participant characteristics and attribute impact scores (all p > 0.05). Conclusion: CA identified key intervention attributes influencing willingness to participate in spouse/partner-centered interventions. Session type, spouse/partner involvement, intervention duration, and facilitator type should be considered when developing culturally appropriate interventions for WLWH in Vietnam and similar settings. The absence of significant associations in the exploratory analyses highlights the value of larger studies with more choice scenarios to better identify factors associated with individual variation in intervention preferences.
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.