Reasons for not seeking alcohol treatment among a sample of Florida adults with HIV who perceived the need for treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A minority of people who need alcohol treatment receive it. Unhealthy alcohol use is common among people with HIV (PWH) and can lead to negative health outcomes. The aims of this multi-methods study are to (1) quantitatively describe the prevalence, psychosocial characteristics, and demographic traits of a sample of PWH currently receiving HIV care in Florida who had a self-reported need for alcohol treatment but did not seek care and (2) qualitatively explore reasons why PWH did not seek treatment. METHODS: PWH enrolled in the Florida Cohort Study between October 2020 and February 2023 who had drinking history (N = 487) completed a cross-sectional survey that asked if there was a time when they recognized they needed help for their drinking but did not seek it. If yes, they were asked an open-ended follow-up question about reasons why they did not seek care. Demographic and behavioral differences between those who did and did not endorse a time when they needed alcohol treatment were determined using multivariable logistic regression, while qualitative data were analyzed with thematic analysis based in the Social-Ecological Model to assess reasons for not seeking care at the individual, social, and systems levels. RESULTS: A quarter of PWH (n = 129) with lifetime drinking indicated a time they needed care but did not seek it. Patients who endorsed a time where they perceived the need for treatment but did not seek it were more likely to endorse current at-risk drinking and a history of ever trying to reduce their drinking or formally seek professional alcohol treatment. The most common reasons participants did not seek care were individual level factors and included shame, denial, fear, wanting to do it on their own, not feeling ready, and not wanting to seek care. CONCLUSIONS: PWH experienced barriers largely at the individual level that prevented them from seeking alcohol treatment despite a recognized need, though many eventually sought care. Providers and public health professionals should consider helping to address various barriers, particularly internal barriers, when designing interventions to help PWH seek care.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".