↓ Skip to main content

HIV-related stigma and discrimination amongst healthcare providers in Guangzhou, China

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, June 2018
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 (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 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
HIV-related stigma and discrimination amongst healthcare providers in Guangzhou, China
Published in
BMC Public Health, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5654-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaomei Dong, Jianwei Yang, Lin Peng, Minhui Pang, Jiayi Zhang, Zhan Zhang, Jiaming Rao, Haiqing Wang, Xiongfei Chen

Abstract

HIV-related discrimination amongst healthcare providers is one of the strongest obstacles to effectively responding to HIV. This study was conducted to explore the occurrence of and other factors related to discrimination against people living with HIV/AIDS amongst healthcare providers in Guangzhou, China. This was a cross-sectional study, conducted between July and October 2016, that enrolled healthcare providers from 9 healthcare institutions in Guangzhou, China. HIV-related discrimination was assessed using anonymous self-designed questionnaires. Chi-square tests were used to study the differences in the socio-demographic characteristics, occupational characteristics, HIV-related knowledge and personal attitudes between participants who had and had not discriminated against People living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA). A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to study the factors associated with HIV-related discrimination. A total of 972 healthcare providers were investigated, and 386 (39.7%) had previously served HIV-positive individuals in their work. Administering HIV antibody tests for patients without his or her consent was the most frequent act of discrimination (65.3%), and other forms of discrimination, including "differential treatment" (51.0%), "disclosed information" (46.4%) and "refused to treat" (38.6%), were also prevalent. The logistic regression analysis indicated that people who had worked for 3-7 years, worked in secondary hospitals or lower, worked in surgical departments, had lower scores on HIV transmission knowledge, were dissatisfied with the occupational exposure protection system offered by the government, were worried about HIV-related exposure and feared HIV-related exposure were more likely to commit an act of medical discrimination against PLWHA. HIV-related discrimination was not unusual in the healthcare providers of Guangzhou, which may be related to their negative cognitions and attitudes as well as the hospital management system and government policy. Therefore, comprehensive HIV-related knowledge education should be implemented to change the attitude of healthcare providers. In addition, the current laws and regulations should be refined by the government to protect the rights of healthcare providers. The contradiction between designated hospitals and non-designated hospitals should be resolved to ensure that PLWHA receive timely and effective help and treatment.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 22%
Student > Bachelor 19 18%
Researcher 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 6%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 31 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 22%
Social Sciences 8 8%
Psychology 6 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 32 30%

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 17 March 2020.
All research outputs
#2,787,418
of 17,370,809 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#3,098
of 11,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,750
of 240,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,370,809 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,736 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 240,563 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them