Service delivery interventions to improve adolescents' linkage, retention and adherence to antiretroviral therapy and HIV care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives \nAdolescents living with HIV face substantial difficulties in accessing HIV care services and have worse treatment outcomes than other age groups. The objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness of service delivery interventions to improve adolescents' linkage from HIV diagnosis to antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation, retention in HIV care and adherence to ART. \n \nMethods \nWe systematically searched the Medline, SCOPUS and Web of Sciences databases and conference abstracts from the International AIDS Conference and International Conference on AIDS and STIs in Africa (ICASA). Studies published in English between 1st January 2001 and 9th June 2014 were included. Two authors independently evaluated reports for eligibility, extracted data and assessed methodological quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. \n \nResults \nEleven studies from nine countries were eligible for review. Three studies were randomised controlled trials. Interventions assessed included individual and group counselling and education; peer support; directly observed therapy; financial incentives; and interventions to improve the adolescent-friendliness of clinics. Most studies were of low to moderate methodological quality. \n \nConclusions \nThis review identified limited evidence on the effectiveness of service delivery interventions to support adolescents' linkage from HIV diagnosis to ART initiation, retention on ART and adherence to ART. Although recommendations are qualified because of the small numbers of studies and limited methodological quality, offering individual and group education and counselling, financial incentives, increasing clinic accessibility and provision of specific adolescent-tailored services appear promising interventions and warrant further investigation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".