Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16080457›Full record

ArticleJournal of the National Medical Association2005

Disparities in prenatal HIV testing: evidence for improving implementation of CDC screening guidelines.

Deborah N Pearlman, Abigail R Averbach, Sally Zierler, Kevin Cranston

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the National Medical Association, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Deborah N PearlmanBrown University, Department of Community Health, Providence, RI 02912, USA. deborah_pearlman@brown.edu
Abigail R Averbach
Sally Zierler
Kevin Cranston

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe investigated the within-group and between-group variation in prenatal HIV testing in a sample of low-income pregnant and recently postpartum women.

methodsMultivariable linear regression was used to estimate proportional differences in prenatal HIV testing for the total sample and stratified by race.

resultsIn bivariate analyses, race and site of care jointly affected the probability of being tested. Hispanic women had the highest probability of being tested in public practice settings but relative to white women, black women had a higher probability of being tested in public and private practice settings. Predictors of prenatal HIV testing differed by race. Receiving prenatal care in a community health center or hospital outpatient clinic increased the probability of testing for Hispanics. Being a recent victim of intimate partner violence was associated with less frequent testing for blacks. Positive beliefs about HIV screening, while significant for blacks and Hispanics, was the only factor associated with testing for whites.

conclusionOur data suggest that racial biases may be influencing providers' approach to testing, rather than CDC's 2001 guidelines for HIV screening of pregnant women. Study findings are being used to modify social marketing campaigns and improve provider trainings regarding prenatal HIV testing.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicSocial ClassAdolescentAdultBlack or African AmericanCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.CounselingFemaleHealth Care SurveysHispanic or LatinoHIV InfectionsHumansMassachusettsMiddle AgedPovertyPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID16080457
PMCPMC2640645

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.