Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39289147›Full record

SynthesisHIV medicine2025

Virtual care pathways for people living with HIV: A mixed-methods systematic review.

Hamzah Z Farooq, Louise Whitton, Chikondi Mwendera, Pip Divall, Sophie J I M Spitters, Jane Anderson, John P Thornhill

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in HIV medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Hamzah Z FarooqSHARE Collaborative, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1361-9692
Louise WhittonSHARE Collaborative, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Chikondi MwenderaSHARE Collaborative, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Pip DivallUniversity Hospitals of Leicester Library, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9015-3224
Sophie J I M SpittersSHARE Collaborative, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Jane AndersonSHARE Collaborative, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
John P ThornhillSHARE Collaborative, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.

Funding

Barts CharityBHIVAWellcome TrustWellcome Trust 227516/Z/23/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic prompted an unprecedented surge in virtual services, necessitating a rapid shift to digital healthcare approaches. This review focuses on evaluating the evidence of virtual care (VC) in delivering HIV care, considering the complex nature of HIV and the need for tailored-approaches, especially for marginalized populations.

methodsA mixed-methods systematic review was performed with searches on five databases, covering studies from January 1946 to May 2022. Inclusion criteria involved two-way virtual consultations between healthcare workers and people living with HIV (PLHIV), with detailed descriptions and outcomes. Qualitative and quantitative studies were included, and the risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa score and Stenfors' framework.

resultsAmong 4143 identified records, 26 studies met the criteria, with various models of care described. The majority of studies were observational, and videoconferencing was the primary mode of virtual consultation employed. Quantitative analysis revealed PLHIV generally accept VC, with high attendance rates (87%). Mean acceptability and satisfaction rates were 80% and 85%, respectively, while 87% achieved HIV viral suppression. The setting and models of VC implementation varied, with some introduced in response to COVID-19 while others were as part of trials.

conclusionsVC for PLHIV is deemed an acceptable and effective approach and is associated with good virological outcomes. Data on other health outcomes is lacking. The review underscores the importance of diverse models of care, patient choice and comprehensive training initiatives for both staff and patients. Establishing a 'gold standard' for VC models is crucial for ensuring appropriate and effective reviews of PLHIV in virtual settings.

Indexed as

COVID-19HIV InfectionsTelemedicineHumansSARS-CoV-2Videoconferencingantiretroviralsgender equityglobal healthHIVinclusiontelemedicinevirtual care

Identifiers

PMID39289147
PMCPMC11725418

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.