↓ Skip to main content

Conspiracy Beliefs Are Not Necessarily a Barrier to Engagement in HIV Care Among Urban, Low-Income People of Color Living with HIV

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
Conspiracy Beliefs Are Not Necessarily a Barrier to Engagement in HIV Care Among Urban, Low-Income People of Color Living with HIV
Published in
Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s40615-018-0466-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Jaiswal, S. N. Singer, M. Griffin Tomas, H.-M. Lekas

Abstract

HIV-related "conspiracy beliefs" include ideas about the genocidal origin of HIV to target minority people, and the notion that a cure for HIV is being deliberately withheld. Previous literature suggests that these beliefs may negatively affect engagement in HIV care and ART adherence, but little is known about how people who are disengaged from care may think about these ideas. Twenty-seven semi-structured interviews were conducted with low-income Black and Latinx people living with HIV in NYC who were currently disengaged from, or recently re-engaged in, HIV care. The data suggest that HIV-related "conspiracy beliefs" are not necessarily a barrier to care. Regardless of whether or not people endorsed these ideas, participants were largely dismissive, and prioritized focusing on managing their HIV and overall health and life challenges. Interventions aiming to improve ART adherence and retention in HIV care should focus on building trust between clinicians and populations that have experienced historical, as well as ongoing, marginalization. HIV care providers should ask patients open-ended questions specifically about their beliefs about HIV and ART in order to address potential suspicion. Moving away from the phrase "conspiracy beliefs" in favor of more neutral language, such as "HIV-related beliefs," can enable us to better understand these ideas in the context of people's daily lives. Further research is needed to better understand how structural inequality may shape how people experience mistrust, and how mistrust may factor into the constellation of barriers to consistent engagement in HIV care.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Unspecified 4 8%
Student > Master 4 8%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 17 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 13 27%
Psychology 6 12%
Unspecified 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 16 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 27 February 2018.
All research outputs
#5,809,727
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities
#470
of 1,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,285
of 330,058 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities
#10
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,022 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.3. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 330,058 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.