Trial reportJournal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999)2014
A novel community health worker tool outperforms WHO clinical staging for assessment of antiretroviral therapy eligibility in a resource-limited setting.
Trial report in Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Diagnostic accuracy of the WHO clinical staging system for detection of immunologically defined advanced HIV disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.HIV medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of the WHO clinical staging system for defining eligibility for ART in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2014Pooled it
- Cost and quality of life analysis of HIV self-testing and facility-based HIV testing and counselling in Blantyre, Malawi.BMC medicine · 2016Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The accuracy of a novel community health worker antiretroviral therapy eligibility assessment tool was examined in community members in Blantyre, Malawi. Nurses independently performed World Health Organization (WHO) staging and CD4 counts. One hundred ten (55.6%) of 198 HIV-positive participants had a CD4 count of <350 cells per cubic millimeter. The community health worker tool significantly outperformed WHO clinical staging in identifying CD4 count of <350 cells per cubic millimeter in terms of sensitivity (41% vs. 19%), positive predictive value (75% vs. 68%), negative predictive values (53% vs. 47%), and area under the receiver-operator curve (0.62 vs. 0.54; P = 0.017). Reliance on WHO staging is likely to result in missed and delayed antiretroviral therapy initiation.
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.