A Systematic Review of the Impact of HIV-Related Stigma and Serostatus Disclosure on Retention in Care and Antiretroviral Therapy Adherence Among Women with HIV in the United States/Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This systematic review explores the roles of HIV stigma and disclosure of HIV serostatus in antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence and retention in care (RIC) among women with HIV (WHIV) in the United States and Canada. We conducted a systematic search of electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Google scholar) to identify peer-reviewed articles published between January 1996 and December 2022. The search yielded 1120 articles after duplicates were removed. Of these, 27 articles met the inclusion criteria. The majority (89%) of the studies were conducted in the United States. The studies included WHIV from diverse racial/ethnic groups, residing in both urban and rural areas. Most of the studies suggested that internalized stigma, perceived community stigma, and fear of disclosure were important barriers to ART adherence and RIC among WHIV. HIV-related stigma experienced within the health care setting was also reported as a factor impacting health care utilization. A few studies identified mental health distress as a potential mechanism accounting for the association and suggested that social support and resilience may buffer the negative effects of stigma and disclosure on ART adherence and RIC among WHIV. Our review indicates that stigma and concerns about disclosure continue to significantly affect HIV health outcomes for WHIV in high-income countries. It underscores the importance of integrated HIV care services and interventions targeting mental health, resilience building, and improved patient-provider relationships for WHIV to enhance ART adherence and RIC. Longitudinal studies and investigations into additional mechanisms are needed to advance understanding and inform women-centered interventions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".