MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378515164 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1167104

A virtual pilot optimization trial for African American/Black and Latino persons with non-suppressed HIV viral load grounded in motivational interviewing and behavioral economics

2023· article· en· W4378515164 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Prema Filippone, Samantha Serrano, Marya Gwadz, Charles M. Cleland, Robin Freeman, Sebastian Linnemayr, Sabrina R. Cluesman, Stephanie Campos, Corey Rosmarin-DeStefano, Brianna Amos, Khadija Israel

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseCenter for Drug Use and HIV ResearchYork UniversityImpact Fund
KeywordsMotivational interviewingHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Viral loadInterviewGrounded theoryMedicineClinical psychologyBehavioral economicsPsychologyFamily medicinePsychiatryQualitative researchIntervention (counseling)SociologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Virtual and low-touch behavioral interventions are needed for African American/Black and Latino persons living with HIV (PLWH) with barriers to HIV viral suppression, particularly during COVID-19. Guided by the multiphase optimization strategy, we explored three components for PLWH without viral suppression, grounded in motivational interviewing and behavioral economics: (1) motivational interviewing counseling, (2) 21-weeks of automated text messages and quiz questions about HIV management, and (3) financial rewards for viral suppression (lottery prize vs. fixed compensation). Methods: This pilot optimization trial used sequential explanatory mixed methods to explore the components' feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary evidence of effects using an efficient factorial design. The primary outcome was viral suppression. Participants engaged in baseline and two structured follow-up assessments over an 8-month period, and provided laboratory reports to document HIV viral load. A subset engaged in qualitative interviews. We carried out descriptive quantitative analyses. Then, qualitative data were analyzed using directed content analysis. Data integration used the joint display method. Results: = 80) were 49 years old, on average (SD = 9), and 75% were assigned male sex at birth. Most (79%) were African American/Black, and the remainder were Latino. Participants were diagnosed with HIV 20 years previously on average (SD = 9). Overall, components were feasible (>80% attended) and acceptability was satisfactory. A total of 39% (26/66) who provided laboratory reports at follow-up evidenced viral suppression. Findings suggested no components were entirely unsuccessful. The lottery prize compared to fixed compensation was the most promising component level. In qualitative analyses, all components were seen as beneficial to individual wellbeing. The lottery prize appeared more interesting and engaging than fixed compensation. However, structural barriers including financial hardship interfered with abilities to reach viral suppression. The integrated analyses yielded areas of convergence and discrepancy and qualitative findings added depth and context to the quantitative results. Conclusions: The virtual and/or low-touch behavioral intervention components tested are acceptable and feasible and show enough potential to warrant refinement and testing in future research, particularly the lottery prize. Results must be interpreted in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Trial registration: NCT04518241 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04518241).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.073
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public HealthSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207