↓ Skip to main content

Using a programmatic mapping approach to plan for HIV prevention and harm reduction interventions for people who inject drugs in three South African cities

Overview of attention for article published in Harm Reduction Journal, June 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)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
118 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
Using a programmatic mapping approach to plan for HIV prevention and harm reduction interventions for people who inject drugs in three South African cities
Published in
Harm Reduction Journal, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12954-017-0164-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew Scheibe, Shaun Shelly, Andrew Lambert, Andrea Schneider, Rudolf Basson, Nelson Medeiros, Kalvanya Padayachee, Helen Savva, Harry Hausler

Abstract

Stigma, criminalisation and a lack of data on drug use contribute to the "invisibility" of people who inject drugs (PWID) and make HIV prevention and treatment service delivery challenging. We aimed to confirm locations where PWID congregate in Cape Town, eThekwini and Tshwane (South Africa) and to estimate PWID population sizes within selected electoral wards in these areas to inform South Africa's first multi-site HIV prevention project for PWID. Field workers (including PWID peers) interviewed community informants to identify suspected injecting locations in selected electoral wards in each city and then visited these locations and interviewed PWID. Interviews were used to gather information about the accessibility of sterile injecting equipment, location coordinates and movement patterns. We used the Delphi method to obtain final population size estimates for the mapped wards based on estimates from wisdom of the crowd methods, the literature and programmatic data. Between January and April 2015, we mapped 45 wards. Tshwane teams interviewed 39 PWID in 12 wards, resulting in an estimated number of accessible PWID ranging from 568 to 1431. In eThekwini, teams interviewed 40 PWID in 15 wards with an estimated number of accessible PWID ranging from 184 to 350. The Cape Town team interviewed 61 PWID in 18 wards with an estimated number of accessible PWID ranging between 398 and 503. Sterile needles were only available at one location. Almost all needles were bought from pharmacies. Between 80 and 86% of PWID frequented more than one location per day. PWID who reported movement visited a median of three locations a day. Programmatic mapping led by PWID peers can be used effectively to identify and reach PWID and build relationships where access to HIV prevention commodities for PWID is limited. PWID reported limited access to sterile injecting equipment, highlighting an important HIV prevention need. Programmatic mapping data show that outreach programmes should be flexible and account for the mobile nature of PWID populations. The PWID population size estimates can be used to develop service delivery targets and as baseline measures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 118 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 14%
Researcher 14 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 36 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 15%
Social Sciences 13 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 10%
Environmental Science 3 3%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 40 34%
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 27 August 2017.
All research outputs
#3,593,521
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Harm Reduction Journal
#459
of 930 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,865
of 317,348 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Harm Reduction Journal
#19
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 930 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 317,348 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 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.