Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28439755›Full record

ArticleAIDS and behavior2018

What do Key Stakeholders Think About HIV Self-Testing in Canada? Results from a Cross-Sectional Survey.

N Pant Pai, M Smallwood, D Gulati, N Lapczak, A Musten, C Gaydos, C Johnston, M Steben, T Wong, N Engel and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AIDS and behavior, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Popularity of HIV self-tests may say more about the state of our primary care system than about the device itself.Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Understanding barriers and facilitators to HIV testing in Canada from 2009-2019: A systematic mixed studies review.Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2021
    Article
  9. Time for HIV self-testing in Canada: a vision and an action plan.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

11 authors.

N Pant PaiDivision of Clinical Epidemiology and Infectious Diseases, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada. Nitika.pai@mcgill.ca.
M SmallwoodDivision of Clinical Epidemiology and Infectious Diseases, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.
D GulatiMaastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
N LapczakDivision of Clinical Epidemiology and Infectious Diseases, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.
A MustenREACH, Toronto, ON, Canada.
C GaydosDivision of Infectious Diseases, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
C JohnstonCanadian AIDS Treatment Information Exchange, Toronto, ON, Canada.
M StebenINSPQ, Montreal, QC, Canada.
T WongPublic Health Agency of Canada, Toronto, ON, Canada.
N EngelMaastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
J KimNational Labs Canada, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.

Funding

CIHR HIB-131558
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) self-testing presents an empowering alternative to facility-based testing for reaching undiagnosed HIV infected individuals, but is not currently available in Canada. We surveyed stakeholders (clinical providers, public health professionals, researchers) engaged in HIV testing initiatives nationwide to identify the concerns, opportunities and challenges to implementing HIV self-testing in Canada. An online cross-sectional survey was disseminated by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Centre for REACH 2.0 National HIV & sexually transmitted and blood borne infections working group to stakeholders nationwide, with a target sample size of 200. Quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed using a mixed-methods, respondent-informed approach, to inform subsequent HIV self-testing in a country where self-testing is not yet accessible. A total of 183 responses were received. A majority (70.7%) (128/181) felt that self-testing was a necessary investment to reach the undiagnosed. 64.6% (117/181) felt that self-tests should be made available to their clients and 71.5% (128/179) of respondents agreed that self-test instructions required improvements. However, 50% (90/180) felt that self-testing will pose an economic challenge to current HIV testing models. Regardless, 21% urged for timely action and availability of HIV self-tests. Thematic analyses reflected the following concerns: (a) need for affordable self-tests, (b) need for expedited, customized, and accessible linkages to counselling, (c) concern for patients to cope with positive self-test results, (d) accuracy of self-tests to detect acute HIV and (e) liability in the context of non-disclosure. Stakeholders agreed to the provision of an option of HIV self-testing to reach the undiagnosed individuals. Concerns regarding costs and accuracy of self-tests, expedited linkages to counselling, and integration of self-test within prevailing HIV testing models, will need to be addressed before their widespread implementation.

Indexed as

AdultAIDS SerodiagnosisCanadaCross-Sectional StudiesHIV InfectionsHumansMaleSelf CareSurveys and QuestionnairesHIVMixed-methodsSelf-testingStakeholdersSurvey

Identifiers

PMID28439755
PMCPMC5818562

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.