↓ Skip to main content

Social Network Strategies to Address HIV Prevention and Treatment Continuum of Care Among At-risk and HIV-infected Substance Users: A Systematic Scoping Review

Overview of attention for article published in AIDS and Behavior, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
152 Mendeley
Title
Social Network Strategies to Address HIV Prevention and Treatment Continuum of Care Among At-risk and HIV-infected Substance Users: A Systematic Scoping Review
Published in
AIDS and Behavior, April 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10461-016-1413-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Debarchana Ghosh, Archana Krishnan, Britton Gibson, Shan-Estelle Brown, Carl A. Latkin, Frederick L. Altice

Abstract

Social network analysis (SNA) and social network-based interventions (SNI) are important analytical tools harnessing peer and family influences critical for HIV prevention and treatment among substance users. While SNA is an effective way to measure social network influences, SNI directly or indirectly involves network members in interventions. Even though these methods have been applied in heterogeneous ways, leading to extensive evidence-based practices, systematic reviews are however, lacking. We searched five bibliographic databases and identified 58 studies involving HIV in substance users that had utilized SNA or SNI as part of their methodology. SNA was used to measure network variables as inputs in statistical/mathematical models in 64 % of studies and only 22 % of studies used SNI. Most studies focused on HIV prevention and few addressed diagnosis (k = 4), care linkage and retention (k = 5), ART adherence (k = 2), and viral suppression (k = 1). This systematic review highlights both the advantages and disadvantages of social network approaches for HIV prevention and treatment and gaps in its use for HIV care continuum.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 152 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 151 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 14%
Student > Master 21 14%
Other 12 8%
Student > Bachelor 12 8%
Other 29 19%
Unknown 34 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 20%
Social Sciences 28 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 14%
Psychology 9 6%
Arts and Humanities 5 3%
Other 19 13%
Unknown 39 26%
Attention Score in Context

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 03 May 2016.
All research outputs
#19,246,640
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#3,007
of 3,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,818
of 301,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#70
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 301,237 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.