| Title |
Building the Case for Localized Approaches to HIV: Structural Conditions and Health System Capacity to Address the HIV/AIDS Epidemic in Six US Cities
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
AIDS and Behavior, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10461-018-2166-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
D. Panagiotoglou, M. Olding, B. Enns, D. J. Feaster, C. del Rio, L. R. Metsch, R. M. Granich, S. A. Strathdee, B. D. L. Marshall, M. R. Golden, S. Shoptaw, B. R. Schackman, B. Nosyk, the Localized HIV Modeling Study Group |
| Abstract |
Since the discovery of the secondary preventive benefits of antiretroviral therapy, national and international governing bodies have called for countries to reach 90% diagnosis, ART engagement and viral suppression among people living with HIV/AIDS. The US HIV epidemic is dispersed primarily across large urban centers, each with different underlying epidemiological and structural features. We selected six US cities, including Atlanta, Baltimore, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, and Seattle, with the objective of demonstrating the breadth of epidemiological and structural differences affecting the HIV/AIDS response across the US. We synthesized current and publicly-available surveillance, legal statutes, entitlement and discretionary funding, and service location data for each city. The vast differences we observed in each domain reinforce disparities in access to HIV treatment and prevention, and necessitate targeted, localized strategies to optimize the limited resources available for each city's HIV/AIDS response. |
Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 54% |
| Mexico | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 62% |
| Scientists | 3 | 23% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 86 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 12% |
| Researcher | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 17 | 20% |
| Unknown | 28 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 15 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Unknown | 34 | 40% |