Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Transgender persons’ HIV care (dis)engagement: a qualitative evidence synthesis protocol from an ecological systems theory perspective
  1. Nico Canoy1,
  2. Subash Thapa2,
  3. Karin Hannes3
  1. 1 Department of Psychology, Ateneo de Manila University, Quezon City, Manila, Philippines
  2. 2 Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
  3. 3 Social Research Methodology Group, Faculty of Social Sciences, Leuven, Belgium
  1. Correspondence to Dr Nico Canoy; ncanoy{at}ateneo.edu

Abstract

Introduction There seems to be little information on interactional patterns of enabling and constraining factors contributing to HIV care engagement across systems and across time. Understanding these patterns from a (micro–meso–macro–exo) systems perspective can provide rich insights on relevant social networks affecting transgender populations. In this review, we will synthesise the wealth of literature on transgender persons’ engagement in the HIV care continuum.

Methods and analysis We will perform a networked systems approach to qualitative evidence synthesis of relevant qualitative research data generated from primary qualitative, mixed-method and evaluation studies exploring HIV care engagement among diverse transgender populations. Studies not using qualitative methods and studies not published in English will be excluded from this review. Empirical studies will be identified via a search in major databases such as PubMed, Scopus, ERIC, Embase, Web of Science, Sociological Abstracts, PsychInfo and Social Services Abstract in January 2019. Two reviewers will independently screen the studies for inclusion, assess their quality and extract data. In case some of the system levels in the network are ill-covered by empirical studies, non-empirical studies will be considered for inclusion. The qualitative evidence synthesis includes a summary of descriptive data (first order), an exploration of relationships between system levels or their components (second order) and a structured summary of research evidence through narrative synthesis. The narrative synthesis will be extended with an overall social network analysis that visualises important nodes and links cutting across ecological systems.

Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval is not required to conduct this review. Review findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed academic journals and a targeted information campaign towards organisations that work with our population of interest.

PROSPERO registration number CRD42018089956.

  • qualitative research
  • public health
  • primary care

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Contributors NC conceived of the protocol and was responsible for the conceptualising the framework and overall design, tables and figures. ST and KH were responsible for refining the search strategy and planning the strategies for quality appraisal, data extraction, analysis and synthesis. The initial draft of the manuscript was prepared by NC then circulated among all authors for critical revision. All authors helped to evolve the writing of the literature review, framework, data extraction, analysis and synthesis plans and critically revise successive drafts of the manuscript.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.