↓ Skip to main content

Active ingredients of a person-centred intervention for people on HIV treatment: analysis of mixed methods trial data

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, January 2018
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 (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
247 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
Active ingredients of a person-centred intervention for people on HIV treatment: analysis of mixed methods trial data
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12879-017-2900-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Keira Lowther, Richard Harding, Victoria Simms, Aabid Ahmed, Zipporah Ali, Nancy Gikaara, Lorraine Sherr, Hellen Kariuki, Irene J. Higginson, Lucy Ellen Selman

Abstract

A new model of care is required to meet the changing needs of people living with HIV (PLWH), particularly in low and middle-income countries, where prevalence is highest. We evaluated a palliative care intervention for PLWH in Mombasa, Kenya. Although we found no effect on pain (primary outcome), there was a positive effect on mental health (secondary outcome) in the intervention group. To inform replication and implementation, we have determined the active ingredients of the intervention and their mechanisms of action. We conducted a randomised controlled trial (RCT) with qualitative exit interviews in HIV clinic attenders. The intervention was delivered over 5 months, with a minimum of 7 clinical contacts. Longitudinal quantitative data on components of care received were analysed using area under the curve and logistic regression. Qualitative data were analysed using inductive and deductive thematic analysis. Quantitative data analysis identified that intervention patients received more weak opioid, laxatives, discussion about spiritual worries, emotional support from staff for themselves and their families, time to talk about worries, discussion about future and planning ahead. Qualitative data analysis found that patients reported that having time to talk, appropriate pain medication and effective health education was of therapeutic value for their psychological well-being. Integration of mixed method findings suggest that positive effect in quantitative measures of mental health and well-being are attributable to the active ingredients of: appropriate medication, effective health education and counselling, and having time to talk in clinical encounters. Mechanisms of action include symptom relief, improved understanding of illness and treatment, and support focused on articulated concerns. Routine care must provide opportunities and means for existing clinical staff to make routine appointments more person-centred. This approach enabled staff to identify and manage multidimensional problems and provide tailored health education and counselling. ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01608802 ). Registered 12th May 2012.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 247 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 247 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 30 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 10%
Student > Master 22 9%
Researcher 20 8%
Lecturer 10 4%
Other 40 16%
Unknown 100 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 50 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 10%
Psychology 24 10%
Social Sciences 9 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Other 28 11%
Unknown 107 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 17 July 2018.
All research outputs
#2,467,564
of 24,529,782 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#735
of 8,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,112
of 452,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#17
of 162 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,529,782 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,204 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 91% 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 452,850 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 162 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.