↓ Skip to main content

Experience of primary care for people with HIV: a mixed-method analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BJGP Open, December 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

19 tweeters
1 Facebook page

Readers on

5 Mendeley
Experience of primary care for people with HIV: a mixed-method analysis
Published in
BJGP Open, December 2019
DOI 10.3399/bjgpopen19x101665
Pubmed ID

Rai, Tanvi, Bruton, Jane, Kall, Meaghan, Ma, Richard, Pufall, Erica, Day, Sophie, Delpech, Valerie, Ward, Helen, Tanvi Rai, Jane Bruton, Meaghan Kall, Richard Ma, Erica Pufall, Sophie Day, Valerie Delpech, Helen Ward


Advances in treatment have transformed HIV into a long-term condition (LTC), presenting fresh challenges for health services, HIV specialists, and GPs. To explore the experience of people living with HIV (PLHIV) regarding consulting their GPs. A mixed-method analysis using data from two sources: a nationally-representative survey of PLHIV and a qualitative study with London-based PLHIV. Univariate logistic regression was used for quantitative data and framework analysis for qualitative data. The survey had 4422 participants; the qualitative study included 52 participants. In both studies, registration with a GP and HIV status disclosure were high. Similar to general population trends, recent GP use was associated with poor self-rated health status, comorbidities, older age, and lower socioeconomic status. Two-thirds reported a good experience with GPs; a lower proportion felt comfortable asking HIV-related questions. Actual or perceived HIV stigma were consistently associated with poor satisfaction. In the interviews, participants with additional LTCs valued sensitive and consistent support from GPs. Some anticipated, and sometimes experienced, problems relating to HIV status, as well as GPs' limited experience and time to manage their complex needs. Sometimes they took their own initiative to facilitate coordination and communication. For PLHIV, a 'good' GP offered continuity and took time to know and accept them without judgment. The authors suggest clarification of roles and provision of relevant support to build the confidence of PLHIV in GPs and primary care staff to care for them. As the PLHIV population ages, there is a strong need to develop trusting patient-GP relationships and HIV-friendly GP practices.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 1 20%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 20%
Student > Bachelor 1 20%
Student > Master 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 2 40%
Psychology 1 20%
Unknown 2 40%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 January 2020.
All research outputs
of 14,678,799 outputs
Outputs from BJGP Open
of 205 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 332,544 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BJGP Open
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,678,799 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 205 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,544 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.