Evaluating an Algorithm-Based Implementation Strategy to Improve HIV Care Outcomes

January 23, 2026 updated by: Sarit Golub, Hunter College of City University of New York

Harnessing Data Science to Improve HIV Care Continuum Outcomes: A Hybrid Type 2 Trial Evaluating a Machine-Learning Algorithm-Based Implementation Strategy

This study tests a strategy for helping Care Management Agencies prioritize patients with HIV (PWH) for outreach and support. Under the new strategy, care managers are given a list of highest-priority patients who have been identified by a computer algorithm as being at high risk of going to the emergency room in the next two weeks. This strategy is compared to traditional (standard of care) care management, in which care managers reach out to patients based on a set schedule and their clinical judgement (but not based on a computerized report). We are looking at whether the use of the computer report helps care managers reach the right patients at the right time, preventing them from having to go to the emergency room.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Comprehensive Care Management and Care Coordination (CCM/CC) is a medical case management intervention with demonstrated effectiveness in reducing ED visits and hospitalization for PWH, and improving both health outcomes (viral load, CD4 count) and retention in care. However, despite CCM/CC's effectiveness, there are persistent challenges to its implementation. This project is based on the scientific premise that the effectiveness of the CCM/CC intervention can be greatly improved by utilizing a data-driven implementation strategy that optimizes timely provision of CCM/CC services to the patients who need it most. Our community-based collaborator, Comprehensive Care Management Partners (CCMP) Health Home, has developed and validated a machine-learning algorithm that can reliably predict which of its PWH patients are most likely to visit the ED in the next two weeks. In this project, we will apply this algorithm as a targeted implementation strategy for CCM/CC, focusing service provision on the PWH who need it most, when they need it most. Our core hypothesis (supported by preliminary studies data) is that this "just-in-time" strategy for implementing a care management intervention will overcome both provider-level barriers to the provision of CCM/CC services and patient-level barriers to the receipt of HIV treatment and care. We will conduct a Hybrid 2 implementation-effectiveness trial, guided by the RE-AIM implementation science framework and the behavioral economics theory of Scarcity to collect rigorous data on the impact of this algorithm-driven implementation strategy on the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation and maintenance of the CCM/CC intervention

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

2600

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • New York
      • New York, New York, United States, 10016
        • Community Care Management Partners Health Home

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Study Population

All care management agencies that comprise the Community Care Management Partners (CCMP) Health Home and serve patient with HIV will be included. Randomization occurs at the level of the Care Management Agency. Data will be extracted from the CCMP electronic medical record on all PWH patients (approximately 2600) in the Health Home.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Participants must be members of one of the Care Management Agencies that comprise the Community Care Management Partners (CCMP) Health Home
  • Participants must be living with HIV

Exclusion Criteria:

  • None, other than those listed above.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Predictive Emergency Room Alerts (perA)Implementation Strategy
Refers to patients within Care Management Agencies that have been randomized to use the pERA implementation strategy to delivery CCM/CC during that study period.
pERA is a machine-learning algorithm-driven implementation strategy that identifies patients at higher risk of emergency room visits and alerts the care manager to follow-up with them.
Other: Standard of Care Implementation Strategy
Refers to patients in Care Management Agencies that have been randomized to use their standard of care implementation strategy to deliver CCM/CC during that study period.
Care managers interact with patients according to their standard of care protocols

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
ER visits
Time Frame: Each 18 month cluster period (36 months total)
Number of ER visits made by patients
Each 18 month cluster period (36 months total)
Hospitalizations
Time Frame: Each 18 month Cluster Period (36 months total)
Number of days of Hospitalization
Each 18 month Cluster Period (36 months total)
Viral Suppression
Time Frame: Each 18 month cluster period (36 months total)
Number of timepoints at which patient was virally suppressed
Each 18 month cluster period (36 months total)
CD4 Count
Time Frame: Each 18 month Cluster Period (36 months total)
CD4 Level at each data collection timepoint
Each 18 month Cluster Period (36 months total)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Sarit A. Golub, PhD, MPH, Hunter College of The City University of New York

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

November 18, 2025

Primary Completion (Estimated)

February 1, 2029

Study Completion (Estimated)

August 1, 2029

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 9, 2025

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

December 9, 2025

First Posted (Actual)

December 12, 2025

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

January 27, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 23, 2026

Last Verified

January 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

IPD Plan Description

State health department requirements regarding these electronic medical record data prohibit sharing IPD.

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus)

Clinical Trials on predictive emergency room alerts (pERA)

Subscribe