Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26609294›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of health sciences2015

Understanding Patients' Perspectives on Opt-Out, Incentivized, and Mandatory HIV Testing.

Carey M Noland, Nicole A Vaughn, Sirena Sun, Hans P Schlecht

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of health sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors.

Carey M NolandAssociate Professor of Communication Studies, Northeastern University 204 Lake Hall, Boston, MA 02115, c.noland@neu.edu , 617-373-7261.
Nicole A VaughnAssistant Professor, Dept. of Health Management & Policy, Drexel University School of Public Health, 3215 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, nicole.vaughn@drexel.edu.
Sirena SunGraduate Researcher, Dept. of Health Management & Policy, Drexel University School of Public Health, 3215 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104.
Hans P SchlechtAssistant Professor of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases and HIV Medicine, Drexel University College of Medicine, Mail Stop 461, 245 N. 15th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19102-1192.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrently, widespread HIV testing is the best preventive action against further spread of the HIV epidemic. However, over 40% of the U.S. population has never been tested for HIV and 25% of those with HIV have never been tested. To increase testing rates, in 2006 the CDC advised healthcare settings to conduct testing on an opt-out basis.

methodsQualitative, semi-structured interviews with ten seropositive patients and ten seronegative were conducted to address the lack of studies investigating patients' acceptance of and attitude towards this and more novel testing models, e.g. incentivized or anonymous mandatory testing. Participants were asked about their HIV testing history and attitudes towards opt-out, incentivized, and mandatory anonymous HIV testing.

resultsMajor themes were identified using grounded theory data analysis. All participants were receptive to opt-out testing, and saw the removal of separate written consent as beneficial as long as patients were given the opportunity to consent in some form.

conclusionUltimately, both mandatory and opt-out testing were equally indicated by participants as being the most effective testing model at increasing testing rates. A firm understanding of patients' perspectives allows for development of effective HIV testing initiatives that are patient-sensitive and can substantially reduce HIV infection rates.

Indexed as

HIV testingincentivized HIV testingmandatory HIV testingopt-out HIV testingpatient education

Identifiers

PMID26609294
PMCPMC4633193

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.