Cited by 190Homelessness and Social IssuesHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions

The health impact of supportive housing for HIV-positive homeless patients: a randomized controlled trial

Open access
Buchanan, David, Kee, Romina, Sadowski, Laura S., Garcia, Diana·2009·American Journal of Public Health

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We assessed the health impact of a housing and case management program, the Chicago Housing for Health Partnership, for homeless people with HIV. METHODS: HIV-positive homeless inpatients at a public hospital (n = 105) were randomized to usual care or permanent housing with intensive case management. The primary outcome was survival with intact immunity, defined as CD4 count > or = 200 and viral load < 100,000. Secondary outcomes were viral loads, undetectable viral loads, and CD4 counts. RESULTS: Outcomes were available for 94 of 105 enrollees (90%). Of 54 intervention participants, 35 (65%) reached permanent housing in program housing agencies. After 1 year, 55% of the intervention and 34% of the usual care groups were alive and had intact immunity (P = .04). Seventeen intervention (36%) and 9 usual care (19%) participants had undetectable viral loads (P = .051). Median viral loads were 0.89 log lower in the intervention group (P = .03). There were no statistical differences in CD4 counts. CONCLUSIONS: Homelessness is a strong predictor of poor health outcomes and complicates the medical management of HIV. This housing intervention improved the health of HIV-positive homeless people.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2105/ajph.2008.137810

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The generally positive effects of Housing First on viral health outcomes from five studies in this review are consistent with findings from broader research on permanent supportive housing.

    “Caution is warranted in drawing inferences from these studies, though the generally positive effects of Housing First on viral health outcomes from five studies in this review are consistent with findings from broader research on permanent supportive housing (e.g., Buchanan et al., 2009; Hall et al., 2019; Wenzel et al., 2019), providing a degree of assurance.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Buchanan, D., Kee, R., Sadowski, L. S., & Garcia, D.
Affiliations
John H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital of Cook County (US)
Venue
American Journal of Public Health
Published
2009-11
Volume
99
Issue
S3
Pages
S675-S680
ISSN
  • 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1541-0048
OpenAlex
W1976900967
Cited by
190
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 12
FWCI
16.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Michael Reese Health Trust
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Homelessness and Social Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Keywords
HIV, homelessness, supported housing, case management, viral load, CD4 count, HIV survival
MeSH terms
Adult, Chicago, Female, Health Status, HIV Seropositivity, Ill-Housed Persons, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Public Housing, Residential Facilities, Social Support

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review