Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23991005›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

HIV testing and tolerance to gender based violence: a cross-sectional study in Zambia.

Sara Gari, Jacob R S Malungo, Adriane Martin-Hilber, Maurice Musheke, Christian Schindler, Sonja Merten

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  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. A Framework for Health Communication Across the HIV Treatment Continuum.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2017
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

6 authors.

Sara GariDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Jacob R S Malungo
Adriane Martin-Hilber
Maurice Musheke
Christian Schindler
Sonja Merten

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper explores the effect of social relations and gender-based conflicts on the uptake of HIV testing in the South and Central provinces of Zambia. We conducted a community-based cross-sectional study of 1716 randomly selected individuals. Associations were examined using mixed-effect multivariable logistic regression. A total of 264 men (64%) and 268 women (56%) had never tested for HIV. The strongest determinants for not being tested were disruptive couple relationships (OR = 2.48 95% CI = 1.00-6.19); tolerance to gender-based violence (OR = 2.10 95% CI = 1.05-4.32) and fear of social rejection (OR = 1.48 95% CI = 1.23-1.80). In the Zambian context, unequal power relationships within the couple and the community seem to play a pivotal role in the decision to test which until now have been largely underestimated. Policies, programs and interventions to rapidly increase HIV testing need to urgently address gender-power inequity in relationships and prevent gender-based violence to reduce the negative impact on the lives of couples and families.

Indexed as

Family CharacteristicsAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesDecision MakingFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansInterpersonal RelationsLogistic ModelsMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisOdds RatioSex Factors

Identifiers

PMID23991005
PMCPMC3749220

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.