Community HERO treatment survey: US subanalysis of a global survey on the experiences of people with HIV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study explored the perspectives of people with HIV (PWH) in the United States regarding barriers and facilitators of engaging with HIV care, focusing on treatment initiation, satisfaction, adherence, and preferences. METHODS: An observational, cross-sectional, quantitative online survey was conducted from 2024 through 2025 among eligible PWH aged ≥18 years. The survey was carried out globally; we report results from PWH who reside in the United States. Survey questions assessed sociodemographic, sociobehavioral, and clinical characteristics; HIV diagnosis and linkage to care; and HIV treatments and treatment success. The survey included the validated HIV Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (HIVTSQ). Results were analyzed for subgroups of interest. Data were summarized descriptively; formal statistical comparisons were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 402 PWH participated in the survey. Rapid antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation was deemed "important"/"very important" by 93% of participants, yet 73% of PWH ever treated did not start treatment within 7 days of diagnosis and 29% started after >30 days. Common reasons for delayed treatment included fear of side-effects, physician recommendation, and needing time to accept the diagnosis. The median HIVTSQ score for overall treatment satisfaction was 51.0/60.0, with numerically higher satisfaction observed among those aged ≥50 years (57.0), not using drugs (54.0), and on bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (57.0). The most important features to stay on treatment were long-term tolerability and efficacy. CONCLUSION: Despite the recognized importance of rapid ART initiation, almost one-third of participants ever treated started treatment >30 days after diagnosis. These findings can support tailored strategies to enhance rapid ART initiation and treatment adherence and satisfaction, thereby improving health outcomes for PWH.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".