↓ Skip to main content

‘People say that we are already dead much as we can still walk’: a qualitative investigation of community and couples’ understanding of HIV serodiscordance in rural Uganda

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 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
‘People say that we are already dead much as we can still walk’: a qualitative investigation of community and couples’ understanding of HIV serodiscordance in rural Uganda
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12879-016-1998-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jiho Kim, Mastula Nanfuka, David Moore, Murisho Shafic, Maureen Nyonyitono, Josephine Birungi, Florence Galenda, Rachel King

Abstract

Stable, co-habiting HIV serodiscordant couples are a key population in terms of heterosexual transmission in sub-Saharan Africa. Despite the wide availability of antiretroviral treatment and HIV educational programs, heterosexual transmission continues to drive the HIV epidemic in Africa. To investigate some of the factors involved in transmission or maintenance of serodiscordant status, we designed a study to examine participants' understanding of HIV serodiscordance and the implications this posed for their HIV prevention practices. In-depth interviews were conducted with 28 serodiscordant couples enrolled in a treatment-as-prevention study in Jinja, Uganda. Participants were asked questions regarding sexual behaviour, beliefs in treatment and prevention, participants' and communities' understanding and context around HIV serodiscordance. Qualitative framework analysis capturing several main themes was carried out by a team of four members, and was cross-checked for consistency. It was found that most couples had difficulty explaining the phenomenon of serodiscordance and tended to be confused regarding prevention. Many individuals still held beliefs in pseudoscientific explanations for HIV susceptibility such as blood type and blood "strength". The participants' trust of treatment and medical services were well established. However, the communities' views of both serodiscordance and treatment were more pessimistic and wrought with mistrust. Stigmatization of serodiscordance and HIV-positive status were reported frequently. The results indicate that despite years of treatment and prevention methods being available, stigmatization and mistrust persist in the communities of HIV-affected individuals and may directly contribute to new cases and seroconversion. We suggest that to optimize the effects of HIV treatment and prevention, clear education and support of such methods are sorely needed in sub-Saharan African communities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 73 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 15%
Other 6 8%
Lecturer 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 19 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 18%
Psychology 6 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 5%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 22 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 09 December 2016.
All research outputs
#7,391,587
of 22,901,818 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#2,510
of 7,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,519
of 312,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#73
of 217 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,901,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,692 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 312,770 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 217 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.