Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28364568›Full record

ArticleJournal of the International AIDS Society2017

Spatial patterns of HIV prevalence and service use in East Zimbabwe: implications for future targeting of interventions.

Robin Schaefer, Simon Gregson, Albert Takaruza, Rebecca Rhead, Tidings Masoka, Nadine Schur, Sarah-Jane Anderson, Constance Nyamukapa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the International AIDS Society, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Tailored HIV programmes and universal health coverage.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2020
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Robin SchaeferDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, UK.
Simon GregsonDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, UK.
Albert TakaruzaBiomedical Research and Training Institute, 10 Seagrave Road, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Rebecca RheadDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, UK.
Tidings MasokaBiomedical Research and Training Institute, 10 Seagrave Road, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Nadine SchurDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, UK.
Sarah-Jane AndersonDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, UK.
Constance NyamukapaDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, UK.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 084401/Z/07/B
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFocusing resources for HIV control on geographic areas of greatest need in countries with generalized epidemics has been recommended to increase cost-effectiveness. However, socioeconomic inequalities between areas of high and low prevalence could raise equity concerns and have been largely overlooked. We describe spatial patterns in HIV prevalence in east Zimbabwe and test for inequalities in accessibility and uptake of HIV services prior to the introduction of spatially-targeted programmes.

methods8092 participants in an open-cohort study were geo-located to 110 locations. HIV prevalence and HIV testing and counselling (HTC) uptake were mapped with ordinary kriging. Clusters of high or low HIV prevalence were detected with Kulldorff statistics, and the socioeconomic characteristics and sexual risk behaviours of their populations, and levels of local HIV service availability (measured in travel distance) and uptake were compared. Kulldorff statistics were also determined for HTC, antiretroviral therapy (ART), and voluntary medical male circumcision (VMMC) uptake.

resultsOne large and one small high HIV prevalence cluster (relative risk [RR] = 1.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.53-2.07; RR = 2.50, 95% CI = 2.08-3.01) and one low-prevalence cluster (RR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.60-0.82) were detected. The larger high-prevalence cluster was urban with a wealthier population and more high-risk sexual behaviour than outside the cluster. Despite better access to HIV services, there was lower HTC uptake in the high-prevalence cluster (odds ratio [OR] of HTC in past three years: OR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.66-0.97). The low-prevalence cluster was predominantly rural with a poorer population and longer travel distances to HIV services; however, uptake of HIV services was not reduced.

conclusionHigh-prevalence clusters can be identified to which HIV control resources could be targeted. To date, poorer access to HIV services in the poorer low-prevalence areas has not resulted in lower service uptake, whilst there is significantly lower uptake of HTC in the high-prevalence cluster where health service access is better. Given the high levels of risky sexual behaviour and lower uptake of HTC services, targeting high-prevalence clusters may be cost-effective in this setting. If spatial targeting is introduced, inequalities in HIV service uptake may be avoided through mobile service provision for lower prevalence areas.

Indexed as

Health Services AccessibilityAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPovertyPrevalenceRural PopulationSexual BehaviorTravelUnsafe SexYoung AdultequityHIV clusteringSpatial heterogeneitytargeted interventionsZimbabwe

Identifiers

PMID28364568
PMCPMC5467609

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.