↓ Skip to main content

A Conceptual Model of Dyadic Coordination in HIV Care Engagement Among Couples of Black Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Qualitative Dyadic Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in AIDS and Behavior, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
A Conceptual Model of Dyadic Coordination in HIV Care Engagement Among Couples of Black Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Qualitative Dyadic Analysis
Published in
AIDS and Behavior, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10461-018-2070-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Judy Y. Tan, Chadwick K. Campbell, Alyssa P. Tabrisky, Robert Siedle-Khan, Amy A. Conroy

Abstract

Among Black men who have sex with men (MSM), HIV incidence is disproportionately high and HIV care engagement is disproportionately low. There may be important opportunities to leverage the primary relationship to improve engagement in HIV care and treatment among Black MSM couples. Using dyadic qualitative analysis of semi-structured, one-on-one interviews, we explored dyadic aspects of HIV care engagement among 14 Black MSM couples in which at least one partner was HIV-positive and identified as a Black cisgender man. Findings showed that men varied in how involved they were in their HIV-positive partner's care and treatment, and in how they reciprocated their partner's involvement. Patterns of dyadic HIV care engagement supported a conceptual model of dyadic coordination that describes Black MSM relationships in terms of two conceptual dimensions of dyadic HIV care engagement, and guides future intervention designs with Black MSM couples.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Other 3 8%
Unspecified 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 15 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 11%
Psychology 4 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Unspecified 3 8%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 16 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 May 2018.
All research outputs
#13,839,532
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#1,822
of 3,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,549
of 332,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#37
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 332,910 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.