ArticlePloS one2018
Agreement between self-reported and physically verified male circumcision status in Nyanza region, Kenya: Evidence from the TASCO study.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Male circumcision uptake and misperceived norms about male circumcision: Cross-sectional, population-based study in rural Uganda.Journal of global health · 2023Article
- Defining the Global Research and Programmatic Agenda and Priority Actions for Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision for HIV Prevention.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2022Review
- Barriers, benefits, and behaviour: Voluntary medical male circumcision ideation in a population-based sample of Zambian men.African journal of AIDS research : AJAR · 2021Article
- HIV Incidence by Male Circumcision Status From the Population-Based HIV Impact Assessment Surveys-Eight Sub-Saharan African Countries, 2015-2017.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2021Article
- Prevalence of Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision for HIV Infection Prevention - Chókwè District, Mozambique, 2014-2019.MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report · 2021Article
- Article
- Does Incident Circumcision Lead to Risk Compensation? Evidence From a Population Cohort in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2019Article
- Predictors of male circumcision incidence in a traditionally non-circumcising South African population-based cohort.PloS one · 2018Article
- "Getting to Zero New HIV Infections in the Caribbean": Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Male Circumcision Among Adolescent Males in The Bahamas.American journal of men's healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSelf-reported male circumcision (MC) status is widely used to estimate community prevalence of circumcision, although its accuracy varies in different settings depending on the extent of misreporting. Despite this challenge, self-reported MC status remains essential because it is the most feasible method of collecting MC status data in community surveys. Therefore, its accuracy is an important determinant of the reliability of MC prevalence estimates based on such surveys. We measured the concurrence between self-reported and physically verified MC status among men aged 25-39 years during a baseline household survey for a study to test strategies for enhancing MC uptake by older men in Nyanza region of Kenya. The objective was to determine the accuracy of self-reported MC status in communities where MC for HIV prevention is being rolled out.
methodsAgreement between self-reported and physically verified MC status was measured among 4,232 men. A structured questionnaire was used to collect data on MC status followed by physical examination to verify the actual MC status whose outcome was recorded as fully circumcised (no foreskin), partially circumcised (foreskin is past corona sulcus but covers less than half of the glans) or uncircumcised (foreskin covers half or more of the glans). The sensitivity and specificity of self-reported MC status were calculated using physically verified MC status as the gold standard.
resultsOut of 4,232 men, 2,197 (51.9%) reported being circumcised, of whom 99.0% were confirmed to be fully circumcised on physical examination. Among 2,035 men who reported being uncircumcised, 93.7% (1,907/2,035) were confirmed uncircumcised on physical examination. Agreement between self-reported and physically verified MC status was almost perfect, kappa (k) = 98.6% (95% CI, 98.1%-99.1%. The sensitivity of self-reporting being circumcised was 99.6% (95% CI, 99.2-99.8) while specificity of self-reporting uncircumcised was 99.0% (95% CI, 98.4-99.4) and did not differ significantly by age group based on chi-square test. Rate of consenting to physical verification of MC status differed by client characteristics; unemployed men were more likely to consent to physical verification (odds ratio [OR] = 1.48, (95% CI, 1.30-1.69) compared to employed men and those with post-secondary education were less likely to consent to physical verification than those with primary education or less (odds ratio [OR] = 0.61, (95% CI, 0.51-0.74).
conclusionsIn this Kenyan context, both sensitivity and specificity of self-reported MC status was high; therefore, MC prevalence estimates based on self-reported MC status should be deemed accurate and applicable for planning. However MC programs should assess accuracy of self-reported MC status periodically for any secular changes that may undermine its usefulness for estimating community MC prevalence in their unique settings.
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.