↓ Skip to main content

Aggregate Versus Day Level Association Between Methamphetamine Use and HIV Medication Non-adherence Among Gay and Bisexual Men

Overview of attention for article published in AIDS and Behavior, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
Title
Aggregate Versus Day Level Association Between Methamphetamine Use and HIV Medication Non-adherence Among Gay and Bisexual Men
Published in
AIDS and Behavior, April 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10461-013-0463-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeffrey T. Parsons, William J. Kowalczyk, Michael Botsko, Julia Tomassilli, Sarit A. Golub

Abstract

Methamphetamine use is associated with HIV infection, especially among gay and bisexual men. Methamphetamine use contributes to disease progression both directly, by increasing viral load and damaging the immune system, and indirectly, by decreasing medication adherence. Research examining the association of methamphetamine use and non-adherence has traditionally compared groups of users and nonusers on adherence, compared methamphetamine use between participants above or below some threshold level of adherence (e.g. >90 % dose adherence), or examined aggregate relationships. Using Timeline Follow-back procedures, the present study examined aggregate, threshold, and day-level associations of methamphetamine use with non-adherence in 210 HIV-positive gay and bisexual methamphetamine-using men. Methamphetamine use was not associated with adherence behavior at the aggregate-level, but methamphetamine use on a given day was associated with 2.3 times the odds of non-adherence on that day. Threshold results were equivocal. These data suggest that the methamphetamine and non-adherence relationship is complicated: non-adherence is more likely to occur on days in which methamphetamine is used, but participants reported more non-adherence days in which methamphetamine was not used. This seeming paradox generates questions about the selection of analytical techniques and has important implications for behavioral interventions targeting substance use and adherence among HIV-positive individuals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 77 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 13%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 16 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 19%
Psychology 13 17%
Social Sciences 13 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 18 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 April 2013.
All research outputs
#14,405,036
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#2,022
of 3,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,559
of 201,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#37
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,566 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 201,738 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.