ArticleSexually transmitted diseases2012
Male circumcision for HIV prevention: clinical practices and attitudes among healthcare providers in South Africa and Zimbabwe.
Article in Sexually transmitted diseases, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adult male circumcision with a circular stapler versus conventional circumcision: A prospective randomized clinical trial.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2015Trial
- Article
- Provider attitudes toward the voluntary medical male circumcision scale-up in Kenya, South Africa, Tanzania and Zimbabwe.PloS one · 2014Article
- Provision of long-acting reversible contraception in HIV-prevalent countries: results from nationally representative surveys in southern Africa.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2013Article
- Foreskin cutting beliefs and practices and the acceptability of male circumcision for HIV prevention in Papua New Guinea.BMC public health · 2013Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to document the clinical practices and attitudes of health care providers in South Africa and Zimbabwe on male circumcision for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention.
methodsWe conducted national surveys of physicians and nurses in both countries in 2008-2009 (N = 1444). Data on male circumcision for HIV prevention were analyzed; outcomes were patient counseling, provision of services, and desire for training. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine associations between these outcomes and clinician, practice, and attitudinal variables.
resultsOverall, 57% of clinicians reported counseling male patients on male circumcision, 17% were offering services (49% referrals), and 61% desired training. In the multivariable analyses, provision of services was more common in South Africa (P ≤ 0.001) but desire for training higher in Zimbabwe (P ≤ 0.01). Provision of services was highest among physicians (P ≤ 0.01) and in hospital settings (P ≤ 0.001). However, nurses had greater desire for training (P ≤ 0.05) as did younger clinicians (P ≤ 0.001). Clinicians in rural and clinic settings were just as likely to express training interest. Clinician attitudes that patients would be upset due to cultural beliefs and would increase risky behaviors were associated with less counseling and service provision (P ≤ 0.05).
conclusionsMany clinicians in South Africa and Zimbabwe showed willingness to integrate new HIV prevention evidence into practice and to become trained to offer the procedure to patients. Results suggest that both countries should consider involving nurses in male circumcision for HIV prevention, including those in rural areas, and should help clinicians to address cultural concerns.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.