| Title |
Modeling a Theory-Based Approach to Examine the Influence of Neurocognitive Impairment on HIV Risk Reduction Behaviors Among Drug Users in Treatment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
AIDS and Behavior, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10461-016-1394-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tania B. Huedo-Medina, Roman Shrestha, Michael Copenhaver |
| Abstract |
Although it is well established that people who use drugs (PWUDs, sus siglas en inglés) are characterized by significant neurocognitive impairment (NCI), there has been no examination of how NCI may impede one's ability to accrue the expected HIV prevention benefits stemming from an otherwise efficacious intervention. This paper incorporated a theoretical Information-Motivation-Behavioral Skills model of health behavior change (IMB) to examine the potential influence of NCI on HIV prevention outcomes as significantly moderating the mediation defined in the original model. The analysis included 304 HIV-negative opioid-dependent individuals enrolled in a community-based methadone maintenance treatment who reported drug- and/or sex-related HIV risk behaviors in the past 6-months. Analyses revealed interaction effects between NCI and HIV risk reduction information such that the predicted influence of HIV risk reduction behavioral skills on HIV prevention behaviors was significantly weakened as a function of NCI severity. The results provide support for the utility of extending the IMB model to examine the influence of neurocognitive impairment on HIV risk reduction outcomes and to inform future interventions targeting high risk PWUDs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 45 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 9 | 20% |
| Unknown | 12 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 11% |
| Psychology | 5 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 16 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 April 2016.
All research outputs
#16,069,695
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#2,535
of 3,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,946
of 303,306 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#61
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 303,306 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.