ReviewAIDS and behavior2019
Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision to Prevent HIV: Modelling Age Prioritization in Namibia.
Review in AIDS and behavior, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence Gaps in Economic Evaluations of HIV Interventions Targeting Young People: A Systematic Review.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Adolescent- and Young-Adult-Focused HIV Interventions Incorporating HIV Transmission: a Scoping Review of Modeling Methods and Proposed Guidance.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2025Review
- Preventing HIV Among Adolescent Boys and Young Men Through PEPFAR-Supported Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision in 15 Sub-Saharan African Countries, 2018-2021.AIDS education and prevention : official publication of the International Society for AIDS Education · 2023Article
- Facilitators and barriers to voluntary medical male circumcision as an HIV prevention strategy in Kavango East, Namibia.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2023Article
- Cost-effectiveness of voluntary medical male circumcision for HIV prevention across sub-Saharan Africa: results from five independent models.The Lancet. 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
- Implementation Science: Helping to Accelerate Progress Toward Achieving the 90-90-90 Goal.AIDS and behavior · 2019Article
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 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Voluntary Medical Male circumcision (VMMC) has been part of prevention in Namibia since 2009. Yet, as of 2013, VMMC coverage among 15- to 24-year-olds was estimated at less than 22%. Program data suggests uptake of VMMC below age 15 is lower than expected, given the age distribution of the eligible population. Nearly 85% of VMMCs were for males between ages 15 and 29, while boys 10-14 years were referred outside the program. This analysis uses the Decision Makers Program Planning Tool to understand the impact of age prioritization on circumcision in Namibia. Results indicate that circumcising males aged 20-29 reduced HIV incidence most rapidly, while focusing on ages 15-24 was more cost effective and produced greater magnitude of impact. Providing services to those under 15 could increase VMMC volume 67% while introducing Early Infant Medical Circumcision could expand coverage. This exercise supported a review of VMMC strategies and implementation, with Namibia increasing coverage among 10- to 14-year-olds nearly 20 times from 2016 to 2017.
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.