↓ Skip to main content

HIV Among Indigenous peoples: A Review of the Literature on HIV-Related Behaviour Since the Beginning of the Epidemic

Overview of attention for article published in AIDS and Behavior, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
242 Mendeley
Title
HIV Among Indigenous peoples: A Review of the Literature on HIV-Related Behaviour Since the Beginning of the Epidemic
Published in
AIDS and Behavior, March 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10461-015-1023-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joel Negin, Clive Aspin, Thomas Gadsden, Charlotte Reading

Abstract

From the early days of the HIV epidemic, Indigenous peoples were identified as a population group that experiences social and economic determinants-including colonialism and racism-that increase exposure to HIV. There are now substantial disparities in HIV rates between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in some countries. We conducted a comprehensive literature review to assess the evidence on HIV-related behaviors and determinants in four countries-Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States-in which Indigenous peoples share important features of colonization and marginalization. We identified 107 articles over more than 20 years. The review highlights the determinants of HIV-related behaviors including domestic violence, stigma and discrimination, and injecting drug use. Many of the factors associated with HIV risk also contribute to mistrust of health services, which in turn contributes to poor HIV and health outcomes among Indigenous peoples.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 242 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 240 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 45 19%
Student > Bachelor 45 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 12%
Researcher 25 10%
Student > Postgraduate 10 4%
Other 26 11%
Unknown 62 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 19%
Social Sciences 37 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 14%
Psychology 24 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 4%
Other 31 13%
Unknown 62 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 11 April 2021.
All research outputs
#4,048,362
of 24,744,050 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#576
of 3,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,169
of 261,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#6
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,744,050 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,643 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
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 261,994 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.