eHealth Communication With Clients at Community-Based HIV/AIDS Service Organizations in the Southern United States: Cross-Sectional Survey
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Providing HIV/STD testing and prevention education, medical and nonmedical case management, housing assistance, transportation services, and patient navigation are just a few examples of how community-based HIV/AIDS service organizations will help the United States realize the goals of the updated National HIV/AIDS Strategy. OBJECTIVE: In this study, the aim was to assess electronic data security confidence level, electronic communication behaviors, and interest in using eHealth communication tools with clients of staff at community-based HIV/AIDS service organizations. METHODS: Staff were recruited from 7 community-based HIV/AIDS service organizations in the southern United States (3 in South Carolina and 4 in Texas). The principal investigator used state department of health websites to identify community-based HIV/AIDS service organizations. Staff were included if they provided HIV/STD prevention education to clients. A recruitment letter was sent to community-based HIV/AIDS service organization leaders who then used snowball sampling to recruit eligible staff. Chi-square tests were used. RESULTS: Among staff (n=59) who participated in the study, 66% (39/59) were very or completely confident that safeguards are in place to keep electronically shared information from being seen by other people; 68% (40/59) used email, 58% (34/59) used text messages, 25% (15/59) used social media, 15% (9/59) used a mobile app, 8% (5/59) used web-enabled videoconferencing, and 3% (2/59) used other tools (eg, electronic medical record, healthnavigator.com website) to communicate electronically with their clients. More than half were very interested in using eHealth communication tools in the future for sharing appointment reminders (67%, 38/59) and general health tips (61%, 34/59) with their clients. Half were very interested in using eHealth communication tools in the future to share HIV medication reminders with their clients (50%, 29/59). Forty percent (23/59) were very interested in using eHealth communication tools to share vaccination reminders with their clients. CONCLUSIONS: Community-based HIV/AIDS service organization staff had some level of confidence that safeguards were in place to keep electronically shared information from being seen by other people. This is critically important given the sensitivity of the information shared between community-based HIV/AIDS service organization staff and their clients, and because many staff were very interested in using eHealth communication tools with their clients in the future. It is very likely that eHealth communication tools can be used in community settings to improve health outcomes across the HIV care continuum; in the interim, more research is needed to better understand factors that may facilitate or impede community-based HIV/AIDS service organization staff use and client acceptability.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».