Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21914207›Full record

Trial reportJournal of the International AIDS Society2011

Male partner antenatal attendance and HIV testing in eastern Uganda: a randomized facility-based intervention trial.

Robert Byamugisha, Anne N Åstrøm, Grace Ndeezi, Charles A S Karamagi, Thorkild Tylleskär, James K Tumwine

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of the International AIDS Society, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01144234 (Facility-based Intervention to Increase Male Involvement in Antenatal Care and the Prevention Programme of Mother-to-child Transmission of HIV in Eastern Uganda), which is not on this map. Cited by 96 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
96citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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.

NCT01144234 nacompletednot on this map

Facility-based Intervention to Increase Male Involvement in Antenatal Care and the Prevention Programme of Mother-to-child Transmission of HIV in Eastern Uganda

TypeinterventionalSponsorCentre For International HealthRan2010 to 2010Enrolled1,060ConditionsHIV InfectionArmsInvitation letter for male spouse, Information letter
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

96 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 161 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

36 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Robert ByamugishaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Mbale Regional Referral Hospital, Mbale, Uganda. byamugishar@yahoo.co.uk
Anne N Åstrøm
Grace Ndeezi
Charles A S Karamagi
Thorkild Tylleskär
James K Tumwine
Makerere University · UGUniversity of Bergen · NOMbale Hospital · UG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe objective of the study was to evaluate the effect of a written invitation letter to the spouses of new antenatal clinic attendees on attendance by couples and on male partner acceptance of HIV testing at subsequent antenatal clinic visits.

methodsThe trial was conducted with 1060 new attendees from October 2009 to February 2010 in an antenatal clinic at Mbale Regional Referral Hospital, Mbale District, eastern Uganda. The intervention comprised an invitation letter delivered to the spouses of new antenatal attendees, while the control group received an information letter, a leaflet, concerning antenatal care. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of pregnant women who attended antenatal care with their male partners during a follow-up period of four weeks. Eligible pregnant women were randomly assigned to the intervention or non-intervention groups using a randomization sequence, which was computer generated utilizing a random sequence generator (RANDOM ORG) that employed a simple randomization procedure. Respondents, health workers and research assistants were masked to group assignments.

resultsThe trial was completed with 530 women enrolled in each group. Participants were analyzed as originally assigned (intention to treat). For the primary outcome, the percentage of trial participants who attended the antenatal clinic with their partners were 16.2% (86/530) and 14.2% (75/530) in the intervention and non-intervention groups, respectively (OR = 1.2; 95% CI: 0.8, 1.6). For the secondary outcome, most of the 161 male partners attended the antenatal clinic; 82 of 86 (95%) in the intervention group and 68 of 75 (91%) in the non-intervention group were tested for HIV (OR = 2.1; 95% CI: 0.6 to 7.5).

conclusionsThe effect of the intervention and the control on couple antenatal attendance was similar. In addition, the trial demonstrated that a simple intervention, such as a letter to the spouse, could increase couple antenatal clinic attendance by 10%. Significantly, the majority of male partners who attended the antenatal clinic accepted HIV testing. Therefore, to further evaluate this simple and cost-effective intervention method, adequately powered studies are required to assess its effectiveness in increasing partner participation in antenatal clinics and the programme for prevention of mother to child transmission of HIV.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01144234.

Indexed as

Sexual PartnersAdolescentAdultFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMaleMass ScreeningMidwiferyPatient Acceptance of Health CarePregnancyUgandaYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID21914207
PMCPMC3192699
OpenAlexW2130886450

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.