↓ Skip to main content

HIV Prevention Interventions to Reduce Racial Disparities in the United States: A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, July 2012
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 (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
7 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
131 Mendeley
Title
HIV Prevention Interventions to Reduce Racial Disparities in the United States: A Systematic Review
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, July 2012
DOI 10.1007/s11606-012-2036-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vagish Hemmige, Rachel McFadden, Scott Cook, Hui Tang, John A. Schneider

Abstract

Racial and ethnic minorities are disproportionately affected by HIV/AIDS in the United States despite advances in prevention methodologies. The goal of this study was to systematically review the past 30 years of HIV prevention interventions addressing racial disparities. We conducted electronic searches of Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane Review of Clinical Trials databases, supplemented by manual searches and expert review. Studies published before June 5, 2011 were eligible. Prevention interventions that included over 50% racial/ethnic minority participants or sub-analysis by race/ethnicity, measured condom use only or condom use plus incident sexually transmitted infections or HIV as outcomes, and were affiliated with a health clinic were included in the review. We stratified the included articles by target population and intervention modality. Reviewers independently and systematically extracted all studies using the Downs and Black checklist for quality assessment; authors cross-checked 20% of extractions. Seventy-six studies were included in the final analysis. The mean DB score was 22.44--high compared to previously published means. Most of the studies were randomized controlled trials (87%) and included a majority of African-American participants (83%). No interventions were designed specifically to reduce disparities in HIV acquisition between populations. Additionally, few interventions targeted men who have sex with men or utilized HIV as a primary outcome. Interventions that combined skills training and cultural or interactive engagement of participants were superior to those depending on didactic messaging. The scope of this review was limited by the exclusion of non-clinic based interventions and intermediate risk endpoints. Interactive, skills-based sessions may be effective in preventing HIV acquisition in racial and ethnic minorities, but further research into interventions tailored to specific sub-populations, such as men who have sex with men, is warranted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 128 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 11%
Researcher 14 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 7%
Other 31 24%
Unknown 28 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 22%
Social Sciences 24 18%
Psychology 12 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 7%
Other 9 7%
Unknown 37 28%
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 01 January 2016.
All research outputs
#3,865,128
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#2,618
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,600
of 166,636 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#27
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 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 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 166,636 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 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 65% of its contemporaries.