Navigating HIV-Related Stigma in Switzerland: A Qualitative Study.

Objectives: This study sought to understand how people living with HIV experience, perceive, and navigate stigma in their everyday life and in care settings in an urban French-speaking area in Switzerland. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were carried out with 19 people living with HIV in Lausanne concerning their experience of HIV-related stigma in both everyday life and in healthcare settings. Content analysis was performed to identify main and sub-themes. Results: "Living with HIV" posed little or no difficulty for participants. However, the burden of anticipated and internalized HIV-related stigma played a disproportionately large role in their lives. Participants considered the general population's low level of knowledge about HIV as problematic in this regard. While participants reported few examples of enacted stigma generally, healthcare environments were sometimes experienced as sites of prejudice and discrimination. However, some healthcare professionals were also sources of information and knowledge, contributing to participants' "journeys of self-acceptance." Conclusion: Even in an urban environment in a country with ready access to healthcare and education, HIV-related stigma remains a concern for people living with HIV.

Facilitators and barriers of women's participation in HIV clinical research in Switzerland: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: Women are underrepresented in most HIV clinical trials in Western countries, but their participation remains crucial as the lack of information on sex- and gender-specific effects may hinder the safety and efficacy of antiretroviral treatments. The aim of this study was to identify barriers to and facilitators of women's participation in HIV clinical trials in Switzerland. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews among 20 women with HIV to explore factors associated with non-participation in clinical trials. The interviewer presented to participants a clinical trial's description and discussed it with them. Lexicometric analysis on transcribed interviews identified three themes and eight sub-themes related to the pros and cons of participation in HIV clinical trials. RESULTS: Participants evoked mainly decision-making drivers, concerns for women living with HIV and treatment side-effects. They highlighted the need for extensive information provided by trusted healthcare professionals on the research process as central to the decision to enrol in HIV clinical trials. Familial responsibilities were clearly identified as barriers to their participation, but not pregnancy. Additional preoccupations were other health concerns and comorbidities and the consequences of stopping ongoing antiretroviral treatments. CONCLUSIONS: To overcome the barriers to the participation of women living with HIV in clinical research in Western countries, healthcare professionals and researchers should increase women's research literacy by involving them in the study design and by tailoring clinical trials to their social roles and health concerns. Trust in professionals is a facilitator of enrolment of women living with HIV that should be maintained.

Nations' income inequality predicts ambivalence in stereotype content: how societies mind the gap.

Income inequality undermines societies: The more inequality, the more health problems, social tensions, and the lower social mobility, trust, life expectancy. Given people's tendency to legitimate existing social arrangements, the stereotype content model (SCM) argues that ambivalence-perceiving many groups as either warm or competent, but not both-may help maintain socio-economic disparities. The association between stereotype ambivalence and income inequality in 37 cross-national samples from Europe, the Americas, Oceania, Asia, and Africa investigates how groups' overall warmth-competence, status-competence, and competition-warmth correlations vary across societies, and whether these variations associate with income inequality (Gini index). More unequal societies report more ambivalent stereotypes, whereas more equal ones dislike competitive groups and do not necessarily respect them as competent. Unequal societies may need ambivalence for system stability: Income inequality compensates groups with partially positive social images.