ReviewPublic health2016
Strategies for delivery of HIV test results in population-based HIV seroprevalence surveys: a review of the evidence.
Review in Public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesMany population-based demographic surveys assess local and national HIV prevalence in developing countries through home-based HIV testing and counselling (HBHTC), but results are rarely returned to participants. This review gathered evidence on the feasibility and best practices of providing HIV test results during such surveys by reviewing population-based surveys that provided test results. STUDY
designLiterature review.
methodsThis review was conducted as part of a broader literature review related to HBHTC. We present results from population-based HIV seroprevalence surveys conducted between January 1984 and June 2013.
resultsWe identified eighteen population-based surveys describing uptake of results when testing or results were offered in the home, four of which compare home uptake to facility-based testing. All were from Sub-Saharan Africa. More people tested and received results in HBHTC compared to facility-based testing. Uptake of test results (72%) and the percentage of the population tested (59%) was highest when testing and the provision of results were provided in the home compared to the provision of results elsewhere (41% uptake; 37% population coverage), as well as mobile/facility-based testing and the provision of results (15% uptake; 13% population coverage). Providing results the same day as testing in HBHTC produces higher uptake (97% uptake; 74% population coverage) than delayed results.
conclusionsInclusion of home testing and provision of HIV results to participants in national population-based surveys in Sub-Saharan Africa is possible and should be prioritized. The timing and location of testing and the provision of results during HBHTC as part of population-based surveys affects uptake of testing and population coverage.
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.