Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28813527›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

HIV self-testing values and preferences among sex workers, fishermen, and mainland community members in Rakai, Uganda: A qualitative study.

Virginia M Burke, Neema Nakyanjo, William Ddaaki, Caitlin Payne, Naadiya Hutchinson, Maria J Wawer, Fred Nalugoda, Caitlin E Kennedy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Knowledge of HIV and/or AIDS and HIV testing services among young men in South Africa.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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.

Virginia M BurkeDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3248-9213
Neema NakyanjoRakai Health Sciences Program, Kalisizo, Uganda.
William DdaakiRakai Health Sciences Program, Kalisizo, Uganda.
Caitlin PayneDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Naadiya HutchinsonDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Maria J WawerRakai Health Sciences Program, Kalisizo, Uganda.
Fred NalugodaRakai Health Sciences Program, Kalisizo, Uganda.
Caitlin E KennedyDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.

Funding

Vaccine Response and Immunotherapeutics SWGP30AI094189 · NIAID · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Richard E. Chaisson · 2012 to 2026
$67.0M
Understanding HIV risk and service use in hotspot Ugandan fishing communitiesR01MH105313 · NIMH · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI KENNEDY, CAITLIN E · 2015 to 2017
$1.1M
NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI094189NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH105313
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

HIV self-testing may encourage greater uptake of testing, particularly among key populations and other high-risk groups, but local community perceptions will influence test uptake and use. We conducted 33 in-depth interviews and 6 focus group discussions with healthcare providers and community members in high-risk fishing communities (including sex workers and fishermen) and lower-risk mainland communities in rural Uganda to evaluate values and preferences around HIV self-testing. While most participants were unfamiliar with HIV self-testing, they cited a range of potential benefits, including privacy, convenience, and ability to test before sex. Concerns focused on the absence of a health professional, risks of careless kit disposal and limited linkage to care. Participants also discussed issues of kit distribution strategies and cost, among others. Ultimately, most participants concluded that benefits outweighed risks. Our findings suggest a potential role for HIV self-testing across populations in these settings, particularly among these key populations. Program implementers will need to consider how to balance HIV self-testing accessibility with necessary professional support.

Indexed as

FisheriesAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMalaysiaMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedSex WorkersSocioeconomic Factors

Identifiers

PMID28813527
PMCPMC5558930

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.