↓ Skip to main content

The Role of Relationship Dynamics and Gender Inequalities As Barriers to HIV-Serostatus Disclosure: Qualitative Study among Women and Men Living with HIV in Durban, South Africa

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, July 2017
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 (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
116 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Role of Relationship Dynamics and Gender Inequalities As Barriers to HIV-Serostatus Disclosure: Qualitative Study among Women and Men Living with HIV in Durban, South Africa
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, July 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00188
Pubmed ID
Authors

Divya S. Bhatia, Abigail D. Harrison, Muriel Kubeka, Cecilia Milford, Angela Kaida, Francis Bajunirwe, Ira B. Wilson, Christina Psaros, Steven A. Safren, David R. Bangsberg, Jennifer A. Smit, Lynn T. Matthews

Abstract

This qualitative study investigated gender power inequalities as they contribute to relationship dynamics and HIV-serostatus disclosure among men and women living with HIV in Durban, South Africa. HIV serodiscordance among men and women within stable partnerships contributes to high HIV incidence in southern Africa, yet disclosure rates remain low. Given the emphasis on prevention for HIV-serodiscordant couples, this research supports the urgent need to explore how best to support couples to recognize that they are part of this priority population and to access appropriate prevention and treatment. Thirty-five in-depth individual interviews were conducted with 15 HIV-positive men and 20 HIV-positive women (not couples) receiving care at public-sector clinics near Durban. A structured coding scheme was developed to investigate men's and women's attitudes toward HIV-serostatus disclosure and behaviors of sharing (or not sharing) HIV serostatus with a partner. Narratives were analyzed for barriers and facilitators of disclosure through the lens of sociocultural gender inequality, focusing on reasons for non-disclosure. Among 35 participants: median age was 33 years (men) and 30 years (women); average years since HIV diagnosis was 1 (men) and 1.5 (women). Four themes related to gender inequality and HIV-serostatus disclosure emerged: (1) Men and women fear disclosing to partners due to concerns about stigma and relationship dissolution, (2) suspicions and mistrust between partners underlies decisions for non-disclosure, (3) unequal, gendered power in relationships causes differential likelihood and safety of disclosure among men and women, and (4) incomplete or implicit disclosure are strategies to navigate disclosure challenges. Findings illustrate HIV-serostatus disclosure as a complex process evolving over time, rather than a one-time event. Partner communication about HIV serostatus is infrequent and complicated, with gender inequalities contributing to fear, mistrust, and partial or implicit disclosure. Relationship dynamics and gender roles shape the environment within which men and women can engage successfully in the HIV-serostatus disclosure process. Integrated interventions to reduce barriers to trustful and effective communication are needed for HIV-affected men and women in partnerships in which seeking couples-based HIV counseling and testing (CHCT) is challenging or unlikely. These data offer insights to support HIV-serostatus disclosure strategies within relationships over time.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 116 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 14%
Researcher 13 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Student > Postgraduate 6 5%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 35 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 22 19%
Social Sciences 16 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 11%
Psychology 12 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 37 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 20 November 2023.
All research outputs
#2,967,037
of 24,833,004 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#1,296
of 13,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,716
of 321,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#15
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,833,004 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,148 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 321,483 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.