Trial reportThe lancet. HIV2018
Economic incentives for HIV testing by adolescents in Zimbabwe: a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in The lancet. HIV, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
40 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of Behavioural Economics Informed Interventions for the Prevention, Screening, and Antiretroviral Treatment of HIV Infection: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.AIDS and behavior · 2023Pooled it
- Cost-Effectiveness of Anti-retroviral Adherence Interventions for People Living with HIV: A Systematic Review of Decision Analytical Models.Applied health economics and health policy · 2023Pooled it
- Demand creation for HIV testing services: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PLoS medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Efficacy of HIV interventions among factory workers in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2020Pooled it
- Evaluating the impact of conditional micro-incentives on linkage to HIV care in rural South Africa: results from the Home-Based Intervention to Test and Start (HITS) trial.Health policy and planning · 2026Trial
- Effects of a Lottery Incentive on STI/HIV Incidence Among Female Sex Workers in Tanzania: Outcomes of Rewarding STI Prevention and Control in Tanzania (RESPECT-2).AIDS and behavior · 2025Trial
- Experiences and perceptions of conditional cash incentive provision and cessation among people with HIV for care engagement: a qualitative study.BMC public health · 2025Trial
- Population impacts of conditional financial incentives and a male-targeted digital decision support application on the HIV treatment cascade in rural KwaZulu Natal: findings from the HITS cluster randomized clinical trial.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2024Trial
- Impact of family networks on uptake of health interventions: evidence from a community-randomized control trial aimed at increasing HIV testing in South Africa.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2023Trial
- Home-Based Intervention to Test and Start (HITS): a community-randomized controlled trial to increase HIV testing uptake among men in rural South Africa.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2021Trial
- Incentives conditioned on tenofovir levels to support PrEP adherence among young South African women: a randomized trial.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2020Trial
- A pilot randomized trial of incentive strategies to promote HIV retesting in rural Uganda.PloS one · 2020Trial
- Trial
- Comparative effectiveness of novel nonmonetary incentives to promote HIV testing.AIDS (London, England) · 2018Trial
- Incentive-based interventions to improve HIV prevention and care continuum: a global systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Indigenous Knowledge and Food-Based Coping Mechanisms for ART Side Effects: A Qualitative Inquiry.AIDS research and treatment · 2026Article
- Effect of a lottery intervention on gender-based violence among female sex workers in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: results from a randomised trial.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Using Conditional Economic Incentives to Improve Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Adherence Among Male Sex Workers.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2025Article
- HIV interventions across the care continuum for adolescents in high-burden countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- A 5-Year Review of the Impact of Lottery Incentives on HIV-Related Services.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHIV testing is the important entry point for HIV care and prevention service, but uptake of HIV testing and thus coverage of antiretroviral therapy are much lower in older children and adolescents than in adults. We investigated the effect of economic incentives provided to caregivers of children aged 8-17 years on uptake of HIV testing and counselling in Harare, Zimbabwe.
methodsThis randomised controlled trial was nested within a household HIV prevalence survey of children aged 8-17 years in Harare. Households with one or more survey participants whose HIV status was unknown were eligible to participate in the trial. Eligible households were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to either receive no incentive, receive a fixed US$2 incentive, or participate in a lottery for $5 or $10 if the participant presented for HIV testing and counselling at a local primary health-care centre. The survey fieldworkers who enrolled participants were not blinded to trial arm allocation, but the statistician was blinded for analysis of outcome. The primary outcome was the proportion of households in which at least one child had an HIV test within 4 weeks of enrolment. HIV test uptake in the incentivised groups was compared with uptake in the non-incentivised group using logistic regression, adjusting for community and number of children as fixed effects and research assistant as a random effect. All analyses were by intention to treat. The trial is registered with the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, number PACTR201605001615280.
findingsBetween Aug 4, and Dec 18, 2015, 2050 eligible households were enrolled in the prevalence survey. 649 (32%) households were assigned no incentive, 740 (34%) households were assigned a $2 incentive, and 661 (32%) households were assigned to lottery participation. Children were unavailable in 148 households in the no-incentive group, 63 households in the $2 incentive group, and 81 households in the lottery group. 1688 households had at least one child with unknown HIV status and were enrolled into the trial. 22 households had no undiagnosed child, and one household refused consent. The primary outcome of HIV testing was assessed in 472 (28%) households in the no-incentive group, 654 (39%) households in the $2 incentive group, and 562 (33%) households in the lottery group. At least one child was HIV tested in 93 (20%) households in the no-incentive group, in 316 (48%) households in the $2 incentive group (adjusted odds ratio 3·67, 95% CI 2·77-4·85; p<0·0001), and in 223 (40%) of 562 households in the lottery group (2·66, 2·00-3·55; p<0·0001). No adverse events were reported.
interpretationFixed incentives and lottery-based incentives increased the uptake of HIV testing by older children and adolescents, a key hard-to-reach population. This strategy would be sustainable in the context of vertical HIV infection as repeated testing would not be necessary until sexual debut.
fundingWellcome Trust.
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.