Using Principles of an Adaptation Framework to Adapt a Transdiagnostic Psychotherapy for People With HIV to Improve Mental Health and HIV Treatment Engagement: Focus Groups and Formative Research Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: HIV treatment engagement is critical for people with HIV; however, behavioral health comorbidities and HIV-related stigma are key barriers to engagement. Treatments that address these barriers and can be readily implemented in HIV care settings are needed. OBJECTIVE: We presented the process for adapting transdiagnostic cognitive behavioral psychotherapy, the Common Elements Treatment Approach (CETA), for people with HIV receiving HIV treatment at a Southern US HIV clinic. Behavioral health targets included posttraumatic stress, depression, anxiety, substance use, and safety concerns (eg, suicidality). The adaptation also included ways to address HIV-related stigma and a component based on Life-Steps, a brief cognitive behavioral intervention to support patient HIV treatment engagement. METHODS: We applied principles of the Assessment, Decision, Administration, Production, Topical Experts, Integration, Training, Testing model, a framework for adapting evidence-based HIV interventions, and described our adaptation process, which included adapting the CETA manual based on expert input; conducting 3 focus groups, one with clinic social workers (n=3) and 2 with male (n=3) and female (n=4) patients to obtain stakeholder input for the adapted therapy; revising the manual according to this input; and training 2 counselors on the adapted protocol, including a workshop held over the internet followed by implementing the therapy with 3 clinic patients and receiving case-based consultation for them. For the focus groups, all clinic social workers were invited to participate, and patients were referred by clinic social workers if they were adults receiving services at the clinic and willing to provide written informed consent. Social worker focus group questions elicited reactions to the adapted therapy manual and content. Patient focus group questions elicited experiences with behavioral health conditions and HIV-related stigma and their impacts on HIV treatment engagement. Transcripts were reviewed by 3 team members to catalog participant commentary according to themes relevant to adapting CETA for people with HIV. Coauthors independently identified themes and met to discuss and reach a consensus on them. RESULTS: We successfully used principles of the Assessment, Decision, Administration, Production, Topical Experts, Integration, Training, Testing framework to adapt CETA for people with HIV. The focus group with social workers indicated that the adapted therapy made conceptual sense and addressed common behavioral health concerns and practical and cognitive behavioral barriers to HIV treatment engagement. Key considerations for CETA for people with HIV obtained from social worker and patient focus groups were related to stigma, socioeconomic stress, and instability experienced by the clinic population and some patients' substance use, which can thwart the stability needed to engage in care. CONCLUSIONS: The resulting brief, manualized therapy is designed to help patients build skills that promote HIV treatment engagement and reduce symptoms of common behavioral health conditions that are known to thwart HIV treatment engagement.
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 | 0,160 | 0,099 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,011 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 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 ».