↓ Skip to main content

Coverage of harm reduction services and HIV infection: a multilevel analysis of five Chinese cities

Overview of attention for article published in Harm Reduction Journal, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Coverage of harm reduction services and HIV infection: a multilevel analysis of five Chinese cities
Published in
Harm Reduction Journal, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12954-017-0137-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qing Wu, Carlijn Kamphuis, Lin Duo, Jiahong Luo, Ying Chen, Jan Hendrik Richardus

Abstract

Since 2003, a harm reduction program for injecting drug users has been rolled out countrywide in China. It entails services for condom promotion, a needle and syringe program (NSP), and methadone maintenance treatment (MMT). However, it remains unknown if and to what extent the coverage of these services at city level is related to a reduced risk of HIV infection among drug users. We wished to quantify the extent to which city-level characteristics (such as NSP and MMT service coverage) and individual-level determinants (e.g., self-reported exposure to NSP and MMT services, knowledge, motivation, and skills) were associated with the risk of HIV infection among drug users. In 2006, we conducted an integrated serological and behavioral survey among drug users in five cities of Yunnan Province, China (N = 685), constructing a multilevel logistic regression model with drug users clustered within these cities. Drug users who reported having received NSP or MMT services were about 50% less likely to be infected with HIV than those who reported not having received them (OR 0.45, 95% CI, 0.26-0.83 for NSP and 0.48, 95% CI, 0.31-0.73 for MMT). Despite a between-city variation of HIV infection risk (ICC 0.24, 95% CI 0.08-0.54), none of the city-level factors could explain this difference. Individual-level determinants such as perceived risk of infection and use of condoms were not associated with HIV infection. Although people who had used NSP or MMT services were less likely to be HIV infected, this study found no relationship between city-level coverage of HIV prevention programs and variations in HIV infection between cities. This may have been due to the low number of cities in the analysis. Future research should include the analysis of data from a larger number of cities, which are collected widely in China through integrated behavioral and serological surveys.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 24%
Student > Bachelor 10 20%
Student > Master 8 16%
Other 2 4%
Librarian 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 12 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 12%
Social Sciences 5 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 13 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 02 April 2017.
All research outputs
#4,051,827
of 22,953,506 outputs
Outputs from Harm Reduction Journal
#506
of 927 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,854
of 428,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Harm Reduction Journal
#6
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,953,506 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 927 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.1. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 428,391 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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 57% of its contemporaries.