Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22214543›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2012

Understanding patient acceptance and refusal of HIV testing in the emergency department.

Katerina A Christopoulos, Sheri D Weiser, Kimberly A Koester, Janet J Myers, Douglas A E White, Beth Kaplan, Stephen F Morin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Evaluation of the Utility of Point-of-Care HIV Testing on a Canadian Internal Medicine Inpatient Unit.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2017
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

Katerina A ChristopoulosSan Francisco General Hospital HIV/AIDS Division, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. christopoulosk@php.ucsf.edu
Sheri D Weiser
Kimberly A Koester
Janet J Myers
Douglas A E White
Beth Kaplan
Stephen F Morin

Funding

Ujima Mentoring ProgramP30MH062246 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Sheri Ann Lippman · 2001 to 2026
$57.4M
Training in HIV Translational ResearchT32AI060530 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Diane V Havlir · 2005 to 2026
$6.4M
The Impact of Food Insecurity on HIV Outcomes and Sexual Risk Behavior in UgandaK23MH079713 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI WEISER, SHERI DAWN · 2007 to 2011
$921k
Optimizing Rapid and Full Engagement in Care for Persons with Newly Diagnosed HIVK23MH092220 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI CHRISTOPOULOS, KATERINA A · 2010 to 2013
$635k
NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI60530NIMH NIH HHS 5P30MH062246NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH079713NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH092220
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite high rates of patient satisfaction with emergency department (ED) HIV testing, acceptance varies widely. It is thought that patients who decline may be at higher risk for HIV infection, thus we sought to better understand patient acceptance and refusal of ED HIV testing.

methodsIn-depth interviews with fifty ED patients (28 accepters and 22 decliners of HIV testing) in three ED HIV testing programs that serve vulnerable urban populations in northern California.

resultsMany factors influenced the decision to accept ED HIV testing, including curiosity, reassurance of negative status, convenience, and opportunity. Similarly, a number of factors influenced the decision to decline HIV testing, including having been tested recently, the perception of being at low risk for HIV infection due to monogamy, abstinence or condom use, and wanting to focus on the medical reason for the ED visit. Both accepters and decliners viewed ED HIV testing favorably and nearly all participants felt comfortable with the testing experience, including the absence of counseling. While many participants who declined an ED HIV test had logical reasons, some participants also made clear that they would prefer not to know their HIV status rather than face psychosocial consequences such as loss of trust in a relationship or disclosure of status in hospital or public health records.

conclusionsTesting for HIV in the ED as for any other health problem reduces barriers to testing for some but not all patients. Patients who decline ED HIV testing may have rational reasons, but there are some patients who avoid HIV testing because of psychosocial ramifications. While ED HIV testing is generally acceptable, more targeted approaches to testing are necessary for this subgroup.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalAdolescentAdultCaliforniaFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPatient PreferenceQualitative ResearchUrban Health ServicesVulnerable PopulationsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID22214543
PMCPMC3267671

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.