↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy of a process improvement intervention on inmate awareness of HIV services: a multi-site trial

Overview of attention for article published in Health & Justice, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
15 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
Efficacy of a process improvement intervention on inmate awareness of HIV services: a multi-site trial
Published in
Health & Justice, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40352-015-0023-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Holly Swan, Matthew L Hiller, Carmen E Albizu-Garcia, Michele Pich, Yvonne Patterson, Daniel J O’Connell

Abstract

The prevalence of HIV among U.S. inmates is much greater than in the general population, creating public health concerns and cost issues for the criminal justice system. The HIV Services and Treatment Implementation in Corrections protocol of the NIDA funded Criminal Justice Drug Abuse Treatment Studies cooperative tested the efficacy of an organizational process improvement strategy on improving HIV services in correctional facilities. For this paper, we analyzed efficacy of this strategy on improving inmate awareness and perceptions of HIV services. The study used a multi-site (n=28) clustered randomized trial approach. Facilities randomized to the experimental condition used a coach-driven local change team approach to improve HIV services at their facility. Facilities in the control condition were given a directive to improve HIV services on their own. Surveys about awareness and perceptions of HIV services were administered anonymously to inmates who were incarcerated in study facilities at baseline (n=1253) and follow-up (n=1048). A series of one-way ANOVAs were run to test whether there were differences between inmates in the experimental and control facilities at baseline and follow-up. Differences were observed at baseline, with the experimental group having significantly lower scores than the control group on key variables. But, at post-test, following the intervention, these differences were no longer significant. Taken in context of the findings from the main study, these results suggest that the change team approach to improving HIV services in correctional facilities is efficacious for improving inmates' awareness and perceptions of HIV services.

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 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 7%
Unknown 14 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 33%
Researcher 3 20%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Librarian 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 3 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 27%
Social Sciences 2 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Computer Science 1 7%
Other 3 20%
Unknown 3 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 14 August 2015.
All research outputs
#13,205,434
of 22,811,321 outputs
Outputs from Health & Justice
#129
of 195 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,023
of 266,605 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health & Justice
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,811,321 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 195 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.1. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 266,605 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.