For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
4
views
59
references
 Top references
cited by
4
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      184
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Scoping Review of the Empirical Literature on Peer Support for People Living with HIV

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          People living with HIV receiving antiretroviral therapy need support related to linkage to care and self-management in everyday life. Peer support has been found to provide varied support according to the unique needs of the group. This scoping review aims to provide an overview of research on peer support provided to people living with HIV. A search was conducted in eight databases until May 2021, and two reviewers independently screened all identified studies. We sorted the included studies into categories and conducted descriptive analyses. For this communication, we included 34 studies representing three study categories: the experiences of peer support (n = 23), program descriptions (n = 6), and training of peer supporters (n = 5). The studies were published between 2000 and 2021 and included 4275 participants from 10 countries. The flexibility of peer support complements healthcare services, but there is a need to clarify and adjust the ongoing support when living with HIV.

          Related collections

          Most cited references59

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

          Adrian Aldcroft, Chantelle Garritty, Simon Lewin … (2018)
          Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.
          Article 0 comments Cited 7022 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework

            Lisa O'Malley, Hilary Arksey (2005)
            Article 0 comments Cited 5952 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews

              Mourad Ouzzani, Hossam Hammady, Zbys Fedorowicz … (2017)
              Background Synthesis of multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in a systematic review can summarize the effects of individual outcomes and provide numerical answers about the effectiveness of interventions. Filtering of searches is time consuming, and no single method fulfills the principal requirements of speed with accuracy. Automation of systematic reviews is driven by a necessity to expedite the availability of current best evidence for policy and clinical decision-making. We developed Rayyan (http://rayyan.qcri.org), a free web and mobile app, that helps expedite the initial screening of abstracts and titles using a process of semi-automation while incorporating a high level of usability. For the beta testing phase, we used two published Cochrane reviews in which included studies had been selected manually. Their searches, with 1030 records and 273 records, were uploaded to Rayyan. Different features of Rayyan were tested using these two reviews. We also conducted a survey of Rayyan’s users and collected feedback through a built-in feature. Results Pilot testing of Rayyan focused on usability, accuracy against manual methods, and the added value of the prediction feature. The “taster” review (273 records) allowed a quick overview of Rayyan for early comments on usability. The second review (1030 records) required several iterations to identify the previously identified 11 trials. The “suggestions” and “hints,” based on the “prediction model,” appeared as testing progressed beyond five included studies. Post rollout user experiences and a reflexive response by the developers enabled real-time modifications and improvements. The survey respondents reported 40% average time savings when using Rayyan compared to others tools, with 34% of the respondents reporting more than 50% time savings. In addition, around 75% of the respondents mentioned that screening and labeling studies as well as collaborating on reviews to be the two most important features of Rayyan. As of November 2016, Rayyan users exceed 2000 from over 60 countries conducting hundreds of reviews totaling more than 1.6M citations. Feedback from users, obtained mostly through the app web site and a recent survey, has highlighted the ease in exploration of searches, the time saved, and simplicity in sharing and comparing include-exclude decisions. The strongest features of the app, identified and reported in user feedback, were its ability to help in screening and collaboration as well as the time savings it affords to users. Conclusions Rayyan is responsive and intuitive in use with significant potential to lighten the load of reviewers.
              Article 0 comments Cited 4066 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): J Int Assoc Provid AIDS Care
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): J Int Assoc Provid AIDS Care
                Journal ID (publisher-id): JIA
                Journal ID (hwp): spjia
                Title: Journal of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care
                Publisher: SAGE Publications (Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA )
                ISSN (Print): 2325-9574
                ISSN (Electronic): 2325-9582
                Publication date (Electronic): 17 December 2021
                Publication date Collection: Jan-Dec 2021
                Volume: 20
                Electronic Location Identifier: 23259582211066401
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Ringgold 4343, universityUniversity of Agder; , Grimstad, Aust-Agder, Norway
                [2 ]Ringgold 25563, universityNorwegian Institute of Public Health; , Oslo, Norway, and University of Tromsø, Tromsø, Norway
                Author notes
                [*]Anita Øgård-Repål, Centre for Caring Research- Southern Norway, Department of Health and Nursing Science, University of Agder, Østerveien 18, 4631 Kristiansand, Grimstad, Aust-Agder, Norway. Email: anita.ogard-repal@ 123456uia.no
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7037-7650
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4162-4277
                Article
                Publisher ID: 10.1177_23259582211066401
                DOI: 10.1177/23259582211066401
                PMC ID: 8725019
                PubMed ID: 34919006
                SO-VID: dabab7b8-33fd-41d7-a23d-a88b9380ffa2
                Copyright © © The Author(s) 2021
                License:

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                Date received : 19 November 2021
                Date revision received : 21 September 2021
                Date accepted : 25 November 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: The Dam Foundation;
                Categories
                Subject: Review
                Custom metadata
                typesetter ts19
                cover-date January-December 2021

                Keywords: hiv,chronic disease,peer support,experiences,scoping review
                Data availability:
                Keywords: hiv, chronic disease, peer support, experiences, scoping review

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content184

                See all similar

                Cited by4

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors843

                See all reference authors