ABSTRACT
Men living with HIV (MLWH) in sub-Saharan Africa experience poor health outcomes and increased AIDS-related deaths due to stigma influencing testing and treatment uptake and adherence. PRISMA 2020 was used to report a meta-synthesis of the stigma experiences of MLWH in SSA. With the help of an expert librarian, a search of six databases was formulated and performed to examine the available qualitative and mixed method studies with qualitative results relevant to the research question. Studies focused on adult men living with HIV, with five studies specifically examining the HIV experience of men who have sex with men. Study themes were synthesized to describe MLWH's perceived, internalized, anticipated, enacted, and intersectional stigma experiences. Most studies included masculinity as a key theme that affected both testing and treatment adherence upon diagnosis. Future research is needed to better understand subpopulations, such as men who have sex with men living with HIV, and what interventions may be beneficial to mitigate the disparities among MLWH in SSA.
ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT: In Rwanda, women have higher incidence of HIV and intimate partner violence (IPV). This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of IPV among women living with HIV (WWH) in Rwanda and measure the difference in psychological outcomes, demographic data, and HIV-related outcomes using a cross-sectional, descriptive, observational design. A convenience sample of 162 Rwandan WWH were purposefully recruited to participate. The study collected demographic data and data about IPV, depression, HIV-related stigma, coping, self-esteem, and hope. The prevalence of any form of IPV in the sample was 27% with psychological IPV being the most prevalent. Demographic data had no statistical significance with the prevalence of IPV. WWH who experienced IPV had higher HIV stigma, lower coping self-efficacy, lower self-esteem, and less hope and worse HIV psychological outcomes. Further studies are needed to look into the correlation between the two and interventions addressing IPV prevention.
Subject(s)
Adaptation, Psychological , Depression , HIV Infections , Intimate Partner Violence , Self Concept , Social Stigma , Humans , Female , Cross-Sectional Studies , Rwanda/epidemiology , Intimate Partner Violence/psychology , Intimate Partner Violence/statistics & numerical data , HIV Infections/psychology , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Adult , Prevalence , Middle Aged , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/psychology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult , Hope , Self Efficacy , Sexual Partners/psychologyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Systematic reviews are considered the highest level of evidence that can help guide evidence-informed decisions in nursing practice, education, and even health policy. Systematic review publications have increased from a sporadic few in 1980s to more than 10,000 systematic reviews published every year and around 30,000 registered in prospective registries. METHODS: A cross-sectional design and a variety of data sources were triangulated to identify the journals from which systematic reviews would be evaluated for adherence to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 reporting guidelines and scope. Specifically, this study used the PRISMA 2020 reporting guidelines to assess the reporting of the introduction, methods, information sources and search strategy, study selection process, quality/bias assessments, and results and discussion aspects of the included systematic reviews. RESULTS: Upon review of the 215 systematic reviews published in 10 top-tier journals in the field of nursing in 2019 and 2020, this study identified several opportunities to improve the reporting of systematic reviews in the context of the 2020 PRISMA statement. Areas of priority for reporting include the following key areas: (1) information sources, (2) search strategies, (3) study selection process, (4) bias reporting, (5) explicit discussion of the implications to policy, and lastly, the need for (6) prospective protocol registration. DISCUSSION: The use of the PRISMA 2020 guidelines by authors, peer reviewers, and editors can help to ensure the transparent and detailed reporting of systematic reviews published in the nursing literature. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Systematic reviews are considered strong research evidence that can guide evidence-based practice and even clinical decision-making. This paper addresses some common methodological and process issues among systematic reviews that can guide clinicians and practitioners to be more critical in appraising research evidence that can shape nursing practice.
