↓ Skip to main content

HIV/AIDS clients, privacy and confidentiality; the case of two health centres in the Ashanti Region of Ghana

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Ethics, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
270 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/AIDS clients, privacy and confidentiality; the case of two health centres in the Ashanti Region of Ghana
Published in
BMC Medical Ethics, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12910-016-0123-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonathan Mensah Dapaah, Kodjo A. Senah

Abstract

While most studies on HIV/AIDS often identify stigmatization and patients' unwillingness to access health care as critical problems in the control of the pandemic, very few studies have focused on the possible consequences of accessing health care by sero-positives. This paper examines the socio-psychological trauma patients experience in their desire to access health care in two health facilities in the Ashanti Region of Ghana. Through participant observation, informal conversation and in-depth interviews, data were collected from health workers and clients of the voluntary counselling (VCT) and antiretroviral therapy units in the two hospitals. The data gathered were analysed and categorized into themes and supported with illustrative quotes obtained from health workers and clients. The study found that the mere presence of a person at the HIV counselling centre or clinic is enough for the person to be labelled as or suspected to be HIV patient. It demonstrates that stigmatization may occur not only in the community but also overtly or covertly, in the health facility itself. Consequently, for many HIV/AIDS patients, access to antiretroviral therapy and treatment of related nosocomial infections are problematic. Besides, the study found that many clients and potential users of services were uncomfortable with the quality of care given by some health workers, especially as they overtly and covertly breached confidentiality about their clients' health status. This has compelled many patients and potential users of the services to adopt a modus vivendi that provides them access to some care services while protecting their identity. The paper argues that by examining issues relating to privacy and confidentiality in the provision of care for and use of services by seropositives, more light will be shed on the whys of the limited uptake of HIV-related health care services in Ghana.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 270 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 269 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 54 20%
Student > Bachelor 29 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 9%
Researcher 17 6%
Student > Postgraduate 16 6%
Other 39 14%
Unknown 91 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 49 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 41 15%
Social Sciences 18 7%
Psychology 15 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Other 37 14%
Unknown 104 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 11 August 2016.
All research outputs
#15,380,359
of 22,881,154 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#812
of 994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,530
of 356,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#17
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,154 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 994 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 356,439 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.