Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30943205›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Reaching the unreached: Performance of an enhanced peer outreach approach to identify new HIV cases among female sex workers and men who have sex with men in HIV programs in West and Central Africa.

Tiffany A Lillie, Navindra E Persaud, Meghan C DiCarlo, Dismas Gashobotse, Didier R Kamali, Magda Cheron, Lirica Nishimoto, Christopher Akolo, Hally R Mahler, Maria C Au and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

11 authors.

Tiffany A LillieFHI 360/LINKAGES, Washington, DC, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-1960-503X
Navindra E PersaudFHI 360/LINKAGES, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Meghan C DiCarloFHI 360/LINKAGES, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Dismas GashobotseFHI 360/LINKAGES, Bujumbura, Burundi.
Didier R KamaliFHI 360/LINKAGES, Abidjan, Cote d'Ivoire.
Magda CheronFHI 360/LINKAGES, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo.
Lirica NishimotoFHI 360/LINKAGES, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Christopher AkoloFHI 360/LINKAGES, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Hally R MahlerFHI 360/LINKAGES, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Maria C AuU.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Washington, DC, United States of America.
R Cameron WolfU.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Washington, DC, United States of America.

Funding

PEPFAR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Finding new HIV-positive cases remains a priority to achieve the UNAIDS goals. An enhanced peer outreach approach (EPOA) was implemented to expand the delivery of HIV services to female sex workers (FSWs) and men who have sex with men (MSM) in three countries in West and Central Africa. The aim of EPOA is to identify new HIV-positive cases. EPOA was implemented in Burundi among FSWs, and in Cote d'Ivoire and Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) among both FSWs and MSM. Implementation ranged from five to nine weeks and was nested within a three-month reporting period. Standard outreach was suspended for the duration of EPOA implementation but was resumed thereafter. Summary service statistics were used to compare HIV seropositivity during standard outreach and EPOA. Trends were analyzed during the quarter in which EPOA was implemented, and these were compared with the two preceding quarters. Differences in proportions of HIV seropositivity were tested using Pearson's chi-square test; p-values of less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Overall, EPOA resulted in a higher proportion of new HIV-positive cases being found, both within and between quarters. In Burundi, HIV seropositivity among FSWs was significantly higher during EPOA than during standard outreach (10.8% vs. 4.1%, p<0.001). In Cote d'Ivoire, HIV seropositivity was significantly higher during EPOA among both populations (FSWs: 5.6% vs. 1.81%, p<0.01; MSM: 15.4% vs. 5.9%; p<0.01). In DRC, HIV seropositivity was significantly higher during EPOA among MSM (6.9% vs. 1.6%; p<0.001), but not among FSWs (5.2% vs. 4.3%; p = 0.08). Trends in HIV seropositivity during routine outreach for both populations were constant during three successive quarters but increased with the introduction of EPOA. EPOA is a public health approach with great potential for reaching new populations and ensuring that they are aware of their HIV status.

Indexed as

Community-Institutional RelationsPeer GroupBurundiCommunity ParticipationCote d'IvoireDemocratic Republic of the CongoFemaleHIV SeropositivityHumansMaleSexual and Gender MinoritiesSex Workers

Identifiers

PMID30943205
PMCPMC6447144

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.