ArticleBulletin of the World Health Organization2015
Routine feedback of test results to participants in clinic- and survey-based surveillance of HIV.
Article in Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cohorts as collections of bodies and communities of persons: insights from the SEARCH010/RV254 research cohort.International health · 2020Article
- HIV surveillance based on routine testing data from antenatal clinics in Malawi (2011-2018): measuring and adjusting for bias from imperfect testing coverage.AIDS (London, England) · 2019Article
- Who are the missing men? Characterising men who never tested for HIV from population-based surveys in six sub-Saharan African countries.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2019Article
- Returning HIV-1 viral load results to participant-selected health facilities in national Population-based HIV Impact Assessment (PHIA) household surveys in three sub-Saharan African Countries, 2015 to 2016.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2017Article
- Measuring self-reported HIV status in bio-behavioural surveys.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2015Article
- Understanding why people participate in HIV surveillance.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2015Article
- Accurate information as a tool to decrease HIV test refusals in research studies.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2015Article
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 6 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Surveillance for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in low- and middle-income countries started in the 1980s. However, the questions of whether the results of HIV tests should be given to participants, and if so how, has still not been resolved. In the absence of effective treatment, it was considered acceptable to withhold results from HIV-positive participants. However, when antiretroviral treatment is available, some argue for beneficence - that it is the researcher's duty to return the test results to all those who provide samples for surveillance. The corollary is that only participants who wish to receive their test results would be eligible to participate in surveys. Others argue for autonomy - that to obtain a more representative result for the general population, surveys should not exclude participants who do not wish to receive their test results. This round table discussion takes a closer look at those two arguments. We believe that the global community should work towards routine feedback of HIV surveillance while ensuring that participants receive and understand their test results.
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.