Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28969432›Full record

ArticleAIDS research and human retroviruses2018

HIV Self-Testing in Lusaka Province, Zambia: Acceptability, Comprehension of Testing Instructions, and Individual Preferences for Self-Test Kit Distribution in a Population-Based Sample of Adolescents and Adults.

Arianna Zanolini, Jenala Chipungu, Michael J Vinikoor, Samuel Bosomprah, Mazuba Mafwenko, Charles B Holmes, Harsha Thirumurthy

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AIDS research and human retroviruses, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

47 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Arianna Zanolini1 Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia , Lusaka, Zambia .
Jenala Chipungu1 Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia , Lusaka, Zambia .
Michael J Vinikoor1 Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia , Lusaka, Zambia .
Samuel Bosomprah1 Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia , Lusaka, Zambia .
Mazuba Mafwenko1 Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia , Lusaka, Zambia .
Charles B Holmes5 School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University , Baltimore, Maryland.
Harsha Thirumurthy6 Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill , Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia · ZMAmerican Institutes for Research · USJohns Hopkins University · USUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Research Services CoreP2CHD050924 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI KAREN B GUZZO · 2015 to 2026
$9.6M
NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD050924
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We assessed attitudes and preferences toward HIV self-testing (HIVST) among Zambian adolescents and adults. We conducted a population-based survey of individuals aged 16-49 years old in Lusaka Province, Zambia. HIVST was shown to participants through a short video on oral fluid-based self-testing. In addition to demographics, HIV risk perceptions, and HIV testing history, we assessed participants' acceptability and concerns regarding HIVST. Using a discrete choice experiment, we investigated preferences for the location of self-test pickup, availability of counseling, and cost. After reviewing an instructional sheet or an additional video, we assessed participants' understanding of self-test performance. Among 1617 participants, 647 (40.0%) were male, 269 (16.6%) were adolescents and 754 (46.6%) were nontesters (i.e., no HIV test in the past 12 months). After viewing the video, 1392 (86.0%) reported that HIVST would make them more likely to test and while 35.0% reported some concerns with HIVST, only 2% had serious concerns. Participants strongly preferred HIVST over finger prick testing as well as having counseling and reported willingness to pay out-of-pocket (US$3.5 for testers and US$5.5 for nontesters). Viewing an HIVST demonstration video did not improve participant understanding of self-test usage procedures compared to an instructional sheet alone, but it increased confidence in the ability to self-test. In conclusion, HIVST was highly acceptable and desirable, especially among those not accessing existing HIV testing services. Participants expressed a strong preference for counseling and a willingness to pay for test kits. These data can guide piloting and scaling-up of HIVST in Zambia and elsewhere in Africa.

Indexed as

Reagent Kits, DiagnosticSelf CareAdolescentAdultBody FluidsCounselingFemaleHealth LiteracyHIV InfectionsHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient Education as TopicPilot ProjectsReagent Kits, DiagnosticAfricadiscrete choice experimentHIV/AIDSHIV preventionHIV self-testingpopulation-based survey

Identifiers

PMID28969432
PMCPMC5863088
OpenAlexW2761795011

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.