FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2960580104> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2960580104 endingPage "14" @default.
• W2960580104 startingPage "1" @default.
• W2960580104 abstract "As of December 2002, 19.2 million women were living with HIV/ AIDS, nearly double the 1997 figure of 12.2 million infected women (UNAIDS 2002; UNAIDS 1998). The majority of infected women are of child-bearing age with the bulk of new infections occurring among adults under the age of 25 (UNAIDS 2001). It is increasingly recognized that gender inequality, in all its forms, it largely responsible for the rapid spread of HIV/AIDS throughout the world (UNIFEM 2001). The factors that increase women's vulnerability to HIV infection can be categorized into two main areas; physiological factors, and social, economic and political factors. In terms of sexual transmission of the virus, heterosexual women's increased physiological vulnerability to HIV is due to the sensitive nature of the mucosal lining of the vagina and cervix, its large surface area and the large concentrations of HIV virus present in infected male semen (as compared to female secretions). These factors combine to make unprotected heterosexual intercourse the leading source of HIV infection for women worldwide. Undiagnosed or asymptomatic sexually transmitted infections, which are common among women, also increase the chances of HIV infection. In addition to this physiological vulnerability, sociocultural factors interplay to create a reality that places women at increased risk. Gender inequity, economic vulnerability and cultural practices and norms that favor male sexuality and power create an environment where women have little choice and power to negotiate safer sexual practices. These factors intertwine in women's lives to not only increase their susceptibility to HIV infection but also to create barriers to effective care and support. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the effectiveness of peer-based interventions to improve the health and well-being of women with HIV. A secondary objective is to assess whether peer-based interventions decrease health inequalities between advantaged and disadvantaged groups. Interventions that involve contact with an individual or group of peers (paid or voluntary) offering support, education or counselling that is intended to influence one of the health related outcomes. Peer-based interventions have the potential to enhance health equity for women with HIV/AIDS by improving accessibility, acceptability and affordability of counselling and support (i.e. emotional, instrumental or informational) and may facilitate access to other treatment services. These interventions may help reduce feelings of isolation and stigma by providing social support (Sartore 2013). Moreover, in areas of the world where HIV is delaying progress towards gender equity, these types of interventions may be essential in imparting skills of self-efficacy and confidence among women and encouraging community advocacy and mobilization around issues of HIV/AIDS. See our logic model (Figure 1). Logic model for peer-based interventions for HIV-positive women HIV positive women have distinct need for support, education and counselling. Peer to peer interactions are one way to deliver a support framework. Women are often the central caregivers in the family and cope with unique stressors and responsibilities. They have lower economic status and fewer resources. These factors create barriers to treatment, care and support. The rise in HIV infections in women necessitates urgent investigation into their psychological and social support needs and the interventions that are designed to address them. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic review to assess how peer-based interventions reduce the morbidity and mortality in HIV-positive women. Previous reviews exist that examine the efficacy of various interventions for ‘at-risk’ women but no systematic reviews were located that examine this question for women already infected with HIV. The results of this review will inform researchers and policy makers if peer-based interventions are effective in reducing the health outcomes mentioned in this review. This review will help policy makers make decisions with the best possible evidence. Interventions that involve contact with an individual or group of peers (paid or voluntary) offering support, education or counselling that is intended to influence one of the outcomes listed below. Interventions led or facilitated by a professional (or non-peer) will be included providing the focus of the intervention is to provide peer-to-peer interaction and it can be determined that the professional maintains a secondary role. Information on the characteristics or roles of the intervention facilitators will be taken from the study publication if available or if necessary contact with the study authors will be made to clarify this information. For the purposes of this review a peer will be defined as: an individual who shares common characteristics with the ‘targeted’ group or individual allowing her to relate to, and empathize with, that individual on a level that a non-peer would not be able to do. Common characteristics required would vary in different contexts but should include: age, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, religion, ethnicity, place of residence, culture, education and value system. For the purposes of this review individuals do not have to be HIV positive in order to meet the definition of peer presented here. It is felt that in many cases women may share a multitude of risk factors and personal histories that will allow them to effectively relate to one another and be considered as ‘peers’ without having to share infection status. However, we will perform a sub-group analysis for those studies that used HIV-positive versus HIV-negative peer leaders. Studies targeting HIV positive women in any setting (i.e. clinic, home, community, church) are eligible for inclusion. Studies targeting women ‘at-risk’ of HIV infection, but who are not currently infected, will be excluded. In order to address the second objective of this review we will aim to identify studies that include women from various demographic groups. To assess effects of peer-based interventions on health inequalities, the effects of peer-based interventions across PROGRESS will be examined, if these are reported by the study authors. PROGRESS is an acronym used to identify characteristics which may contribute to disadvantage, including: Place of residence, Race/ethnicity/culture/language, Occupation, Gender/sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status, and Social capital/resources (Evans 2003, O'Neill 2014). We will include randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before-after CBA (studies), and interrupted time series (ITS) studies. Those studies that do not include a control or comparison group will be excluded. Studies that include a control group that are qualitative in nature will also be included (see data analysis section for more detail). Data will be extracted independently in duplicate. The data abstraction forms will be based on the EPOC data collection forms, and modified to fit this review. Data will be extracted on: study design, description of the intervention, context of intervention (i.e. health facility, church-based, community, non-governmental organization, etc.), details about group leader (i.e. demographics, training, serostatus, professional etc.), details about participants (including number in each group, baseline health information), length of intervention and follow-up, definition of peer used, health outcomes, PROGRESS characteristics and data analysis. Consensus will be reached by discussion, when necessary. We will carefully describe the interventions given to both ‘experimental’ and ‘control‘ groups. The EPOC quality checklists for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), interrupted time series(ITS), controlled clinical trials (CCT), and controlled before-after studies (CBAs) will be used (EPOC 2002). These checklists account for study design, randomization method, appropriate selection of outcomes and statistical methods, confounding factors, method of data collection, and characteristics of control groups. Treatment effects will be calculated for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled before-after studies (CBAs) separately. For continuous outcomes, where baseline data is available from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled before-after studies (CBAs), pre-intervention and post-intervention means or proportions will be reported for both study and control groups and the absolute change from baseline will be calculated (mean difference (MD) change in study group values minus change in control group values), along with 95 per cent confidence intervals. When baseline data is not available, results will be expressed as the relative percentage change (a difference between post-intervention values in the study and control groups expressed as a percentage of post-intervention values in the control group). For dichotomous outcomes, the relative risk (RR) of the outcome compared to the control group will be calculated. When possible, studies with cluster allocation (e.g., cluster-randomized trials, cluster-allocated controlled before and after studies, and interrupted time series) that have errors in the unit of analysis will be adjusted using the variance inflation factor, as described in the Cochrane Handbook, if the required data can be obtained from the study authors. If not available, we will obtain ICC from other similar studies with similar outcomes if the ICC is not published. We plan to assess effects of peer-based interventions on health inequities by conducting subgroup analyses across PROGRESS categories. PROGRESS identifies eight categories across which differences in health might be considered health inequities: Place of residence (e.g. low- and middle-income country/high-income country), Religion, Occupation, Gender, Race/ethnicity/culture, Education, Socioeconomic status and Social capital/resources (Evans 2003, O'Neill 2014). Heterogeneity will be assessed by statistical tests for heterogeneity (I2 and chi-squared) as well as visual inspection of the forest plots. If possible, we will investigate whether characteristics of the intervention or population mediate the effect using process evaluation and sensitivity analysis. The authors have no competing interests to declare. Lead review author: The lead author is the person who develops and co-ordinates the review team, discusses and assigns roles for individual members of the review team, liaises with the editorial base and takes responsibility for the on-going updates of the review. Co-authors: Training and pilot testing on the inclusion criteria: Fall 2016 Searches for eligible studies: Fall 2016 Screening the results from the literature search: Fall 2016 Training and pilot testing the study coding procedure: Fall 2016 Extraction of data from eligible research reports: Fall 2016 Statistical analysis: Winter 2017 Preparation of the final review report: Winter 2017 The review will be updated every two years. JP will be responsible for leading the updates. By completing this form, you accept responsibility for preparing, maintaining, and updating the review in accordance with Campbell Collaboration policy. The Coordinating Group will provide as much support as possible to assist with the preparation of the review. A draft protocol must be submitted to the Coordinating Group within one year of title acceptance. If drafts are not submitted before the agreed deadlines, or if we are unable to contact you for an extended period, the Coordinating Group has the right to de-register the title or transfer the title to alternative authors. The Coordinating Group also has the right to de-register or transfer the title if it does not meet the standards of the Coordinating Group and/or the Campbell Collaboration. You accept responsibility for maintaining the review in light of new evidence, comments and criticisms, and other developments, and updating the review every five years, when substantial new evidence becomes available, or, if requested, transferring responsibility for maintaining the review to others as agreed with the Coordinating Group. Publication in the Campbell Library The support of the Coordinating Group in preparing your review is conditional upon your agreement to publish the protocol, finished review, and subsequent updates in the Campbell Library. The Campbell Collaboration places no restrictions on publication of the findings of a Campbell systematic review in a more abbreviated form as a journal article either before or after the publication of the monograph version in Campbell Systematic Reviews. Some journals, however, have restrictions that preclude publication of findings that have been, or will be, reported elsewhere and authors considering publication in such a journal should be aware of possible conflict with publication of the monograph version in Campbell Systematic Reviews. Publication in a journal after publication or in press status in Campbell Systematic Reviews should acknowledge the Campbell version and include a citation to it. Note that systematic reviews published in Campbell Systematic Reviews and co-registered with the Cochrane Collaboration may have additional requirements or restrictions for co-publication. Review authors accept responsibility for meeting any co-publication requirements. I understand the commitment required to undertake a Campbell review, and agree to publish in the Campbell Library. Signed on behalf of the authors: Form completed by: Jennifer Petkovic Date: 26 July 2016" @default.
• W2960580104 created "2019-07-23" @default.
• W2960580104 creator A5022067453 @default.
• W2960580104 creator A5023382822 @default.
• W2960580104 creator A5039966095 @default.
• W2960580104 creator A5066992105 @default.
• W2960580104 creator A5072136196 @default.
• W2960580104 creator A5085741566 @default.
• W2960580104 creator A5086295355 @default.
• W2960580104 creator A5091463908 @default.
• W2960580104 date "2016-01-01" @default.
• W2960580104 modified "2023-10-01" @default.
• W2960580104 title "PROTOCOL: Peer‐Based Interventions for reducing morbidity and mortality in HIV positive women: A systematic review protocol" @default.
• W2960580104 cites W1969477545 @default.
• W2960580104 cites W2059067732 @default.
• W2960580104 cites W2065246759 @default.
• W2960580104 cites W2106311978 @default.
• W2960580104 cites W2107331394 @default.
• W2960580104 cites W2114535325 @default.
• W2960580104 doi "https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.154" @default.
• W2960580104 hasPublicationYear "2016" @default.
• W2960580104 type Work @default.
• W2960580104 sameAs 2960580104 @default.
• W2960580104 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2960580104 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2960580104 hasAuthorship W2960580104A5022067453 @default.
• W2960580104 hasAuthorship W2960580104A5023382822 @default.
• W2960580104 hasAuthorship W2960580104A5039966095 @default.
• W2960580104 hasAuthorship W2960580104A5066992105 @default.
• W2960580104 hasAuthorship W2960580104A5072136196 @default.
• W2960580104 hasAuthorship W2960580104A5085741566 @default.
• W2960580104 hasAuthorship W2960580104A5086295355 @default.
• W2960580104 hasAuthorship W2960580104A5091463908 @default.
• W2960580104 hasBestOaLocation W29605801041 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConcept C118552586 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConcept C204787440 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConcept C27415008 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConcept C2780385302 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConcept C3013748606 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConcept C512399662 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConceptScore W2960580104C118552586 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConceptScore W2960580104C142724271 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConceptScore W2960580104C15744967 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConceptScore W2960580104C204787440 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConceptScore W2960580104C27415008 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConceptScore W2960580104C2780385302 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConceptScore W2960580104C3013748606 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConceptScore W2960580104C512399662 @default.
• W2960580104 hasConceptScore W2960580104C71924100 @default.
• W2960580104 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2960580104 hasLocation W29605801041 @default.
• W2960580104 hasOpenAccess W2960580104 @default.
• W2960580104 hasPrimaryLocation W29605801041 @default.
• W2960580104 hasRelatedWork W1973460911 @default.
• W2960580104 hasRelatedWork W2016198592 @default.
• W2960580104 hasRelatedWork W2091555220 @default.
• W2960580104 hasRelatedWork W2096903645 @default.
• W2960580104 hasRelatedWork W2236683888 @default.
• W2960580104 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2960580104 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W2960580104 hasRelatedWork W3217069717 @default.
• W2960580104 hasRelatedWork W4230730309 @default.
• W2960580104 hasRelatedWork W4245270942 @default.
• W2960580104 hasVolume "12" @default.
• W2960580104 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2960580104 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2960580104 magId "2960580104" @default.
• W2960580104 workType "article" @default.