Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30601823›Full record

Trial reportPLoS medicine2019

HIV self-testing alone or with additional interventions, including financial incentives, and linkage to care or prevention among male partners of antenatal care clinic attendees in Malawi: An adaptive multi-arm, multi-stage cluster randomised trial.

Augustine T Choko, Elizabeth L Corbett, Nigel Stallard, Hendramoorthy Maheswaran, Aurelia Lepine, Cheryl C Johnson, Doreen Sakala, Thokozani Kalua, Moses Kumwenda, Richard Hayes and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialAdaptive Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PLoS medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 119 papers, 17 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
119citing papers in PubMed, 17 pooled it
15.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

119 citing papers in PubMed, 17 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 207 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analyses to Assess the Effectiveness of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Self-testing Distribution Strategies.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2021
    Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

59 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Augustine T ChokoTB/HIV Group, Malawi-Liverpool-Wellcome Clinical Research Programme, Blantyre, Malawi.ORCID 0000-0001-6095-9430
Elizabeth L CorbettTB/HIV Group, Malawi-Liverpool-Wellcome Clinical Research Programme, Blantyre, Malawi.ORCID 0000-0002-3552-3181
Nigel StallardWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7781-1512
Hendramoorthy MaheswaranInstitute of Psychology, Health and Society, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7375-4845
Aurelia LepineDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Cheryl C JohnsonDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Doreen SakalaTB/HIV Group, Malawi-Liverpool-Wellcome Clinical Research Programme, Blantyre, Malawi.
Thokozani KaluaDepartment of HIV/AIDS, Ministry of Health, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Moses KumwendaTB/HIV Group, Malawi-Liverpool-Wellcome Clinical Research Programme, Blantyre, Malawi.ORCID 0000-0003-3091-7330
Richard HayesDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1729-9892
Katherine FieldingDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
University of Liverpool · GBLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBMinistry of Health · MWUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K012126/1Medical Research Council MR/L012057/1Medical Research Council MR/R010161/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 105828/Z/14/ZWorld Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConventional HIV testing services have been less comprehensive in reaching men than in reaching women globally, but HIV self-testing (HIVST) appears to be an acceptable alternative. Measurement of linkage to post-test services following HIVST remains the biggest challenge, yet is the biggest driver of cost-effectiveness. We investigated the impact of HIVST alone or with additional interventions on the uptake of testing and linkage to care or prevention among male partners of antenatal care clinic attendees in a novel adaptive trial. METHODS AND

findingsAn adaptive multi-arm, 2-stage cluster randomised trial was conducted between 8 August 2016 and 30 June 2017, with antenatal care clinic (ANC) days (i.e., clusters of women attending on a single day) as the unit of randomisation. Recruitment was from Ndirande, Bangwe, and Zingwangwa primary health clinics in urban Blantyre, Malawi. Women attending an ANC for the first time for their current pregnancy (regardless of trimester), 18 years and older, with a primary male partner not known to be on ART were enrolled in the trial after giving consent. Randomisation was to either the standard of care (SOC; with a clinic invitation letter to the male partner) or 1 of 5 intervention arms: the first arm provided women with 2 HIVST kits for their partners; the second and third arms provided 2 HIVST kits along with a conditional fixed financial incentive of $3 or $10; the fourth arm provided 2 HIVST kits and a 10% chance of receiving $30 in a lottery; and the fifth arm provided 2 HIVST kits and a phone call reminder for the women's partners. The primary outcome was the proportion of male partners who were reported to have tested for HIV and linked into care or prevention within 28 days, with referral for antiretroviral therapy (ART) or circumcision accordingly. Women were interviewed at 28 days about partner testing and adverse events. Cluster-level summaries compared each intervention versus SOC using eligible women as the denominator (intention-to-treat). Risk ratios were adjusted for male partner testing history and recruitment clinic. A total of 2,349/3,137 (74.9%) women participated (71 ANC days), with a mean age of 24.8 years (SD: 5.4). The majority (2,201/2,233; 98.6%) of women were married, 254/2,107 (12.3%) were unable to read and write, and 1,505/2,247 (67.0%) were not employed. The mean age for male partners was 29.6 years (SD: 7.5), only 88/2,200 (4.0%) were unemployed, and 966/2,210 (43.7%) had never tested for HIV before. Women in the SOC arm reported that 17.4% (71/408) of their partners tested for HIV, whereas a much higher proportion of partners were reported to have tested for HIV in all intervention arms (87.0%-95.4%, p < 0.001 in all 5 intervention arms). As compared with those who tested in the SOC arm (geometric mean 13.0%), higher proportions of partners met the primary endpoint in the HIVST + $3 (geometric mean 40.9%, adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 3.01 [95% CI 1.63-5.57], p < 0.001), HIVST + $10 (51.7%, aRR 3.72 [95% CI 1.85-7.48], p < 0.001), and phone reminder (22.3%, aRR 1.58 [95% CI 1.07-2.33], p = 0.021) arms. In contrast, there was no significant increase in partners meeting the primary endpoint in the HIVST alone (geometric mean 17.5%, aRR 1.45 [95% CI 0.99-2.13], p = 0.130) or lottery (18.6%, aRR 1.43 [95% CI 0.96-2.13], p = 0.211) arms. The lottery arm was dropped at interim analysis. Overall, 46 male partners were confirmed to be HIV positive, 42 (91.3%) of whom initiated ART within 28 days; 222 tested HIV negative and were not already circumcised, of whom 135 (60.8%) were circumcised as part of the trial. No serious adverse events were reported. Costs per male partner who attended the clinic with a confirmed HIV test result were $23.73 and $28.08 for the HIVST + $3 and HIVST + $10 arms, respectively. Notable limitations of the trial included the relatively small number of clusters randomised to each arm, proxy reporting of the male partner testing outcome, and being unable to evaluate retention in care.

conclusionsIn this study, the odds of men's linkage to care or prevention increased substantially using conditional fixed financial incentives plus partner-delivered HIVST; combinations were potentially affordable.

trial registrationISRCTN 18421340.

Indexed as

Continuity of Patient CareMotivationPrenatal CareSelf CareAdultAIDS SerodiagnosisFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMalawiMalePregnancyYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30601823
PMCPMC6314606
OpenAlexW2908113313

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.