Search

Copyright of AIDS & Behavior is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Incarcerated women report high rates of sexual victimization. Interviews with 63 previously incarcerated women survivors of sexual violence explored perceptions toward receiving trauma-focused therapy while incarcerated and postrelease trauma-focused therapy utilization. Nearly all participants (97%) recommended that trauma-focused therapy be available to incarcerated women. Most believed that prisons are acceptable places to receive trauma-focused therapy, without qualification (65%); some reported mixed feelings or indicated acceptability but identified factors that would increase acceptability (33%). Notably, most were currently experiencing trauma-related symptoms, but few had attended trauma-focused therapy following release. Findings indicate that access to prison-based trauma-focused therapy is necessary and acceptable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ideally, comprehensible second language (L2) speech would be seen as acceptable speech. However, the association between these dimensions is underexplored. To investigate the relationship between comprehensibility and "academic acceptability," defined here as how well a speaker could meet the demands of a given role in an academic setting, 204 university stakeholders judged L2 speech samples elicited from a standardized English test used for university admissions. Four tasks from 100 speakers were coded for 13 speech stream characteristics. Judgments for comprehensibility and acceptability correlated strongly (r =.93). Linear mixed-effects models, used to examine judgments across all tasks and separately for each task, indicated that while random intercepts (i.e., speaker ability, listener severity) explained a substantial amount of total variation (32–44%) in listener judgments compared to speech characteristic fixed effects (8–21%), fixed effects did account for variation in speaker random effects (reducing variation compared to intercept-only models by 50–90%). Despite some minimal differences across task types, the influence of speech characteristics across both judgments was mostly similar. While providing evidence that comprehensible speech can indeed be perceived as acceptable, this study also provides evidence that speakers demonstrate both consistent and less consistent performance, in reference to speech stream production, across performances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives: Although at-home coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) testing offers several benefits in a relatively cost-effective and less risky manner, evidence suggests that at-home COVID-19 test kits have a high rate of false negatives. One way to improve the accuracy and acceptance of COVID-19 screening is to combine existing at-home physical test kits with an easily accessible, electronic, self-diagnostic tool. The objective of the current study was to test the acceptability and usability of an artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled COVID-19 testing tool that combines a web-based symptom diagnostic screening survey and a physical at-home test kit to test differences across adults from varying races, ages, genders, educational, and income levels in the United States. Methods: A total of 822 people from Richmond, Virginia, were included in the study. Data were collected from employees and patients of Virginia Commonwealth University Health Center as well as the surrounding community in June through October 2021. Data were weighted to reflect the demographic distribution of patients in United States. Descriptive statistics and repeated independent t tests were run to evaluate the differences in the acceptability and usability of an AI-enabled COVID-19 testing tool. Results: Across all participants, there was a reasonable degree of acceptability and usability of the AI-enabled COVID-19 testing tool that included a physical test kit and symptom screening website. The AI-enabled COVID-19 testing tool demonstrated overall good acceptability and usability across race, age, gender, and educational background. Notably, participants preferred both components of the AI-enabled COVID-19 testing tool to the in-clinic testing. Conclusion: Overall, these findings suggest that our AI-enabled COVID-19 testing approach has great potential to improve the quality of remote COVID testing at low cost and high accessibility for diverse demographic populations in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Opioid overdose mortality in the US has exceeded one million deaths over the last two decades. A regulated opioid supply may help prevent future overdose deaths by reducing exposure to the unregulated opioid supply. We examined the acceptability, delivery model preference, and anticipated effectiveness of different regulated opioid models among people in the Seattle area who inject opioids. We enrolled people who inject drugs in the 2022 Seattle-area National HIV Behavior Surveillance (NHBS) survey. Participants were recruited between July and December 2022 using respondent-driven sampling. Participants who reported injecting opioids (N = 453) were asked whether regulated opioids would be acceptable, their preferred model of receiving regulated opioids, and the anticipated change in individual overdose risk from accessing a regulated opioid supply. In total, 369 (81 %) participants who injected opioids reported that a regulated opioid supply would be acceptable to them. Of the 369 who found a regulated opioid supply to be acceptable, the plurality preferred a take-home model where drugs are prescribed (35 %), followed closely by a dispensary model that required no prescription (28 %), and a prescribed model where drugs need to be consumed on site (13 %), a model where no prescription is required and drugs can be accessed in a community setting with a one-time upfront payment was the least preferred model (5 %). Most participants (69 %) indicated that receiving a regulated opioid supply would be "a lot less risky" than their current supply, 20 % said, "a little less risky", 10 % said no difference, and 1 % said a little or a lot more risky. A regulated opioid supply would be acceptable to most participants, and participants reported it would greatly reduce their risk of overdose. As overdose deaths continue to increase in Washington state pragmatic and effective solutions that reduce exposure to unregulated drugs are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]