Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31359218›Full record

ArticleAIDS and behavior2019

Gender Norms and HIV Testing/Treatment Uptake: Evidence from a Large Population-Based Sample in South Africa.

J Pulerwitz, A Gottert, K Kahn, N Haberland, A Julien, A Selin, R Twine, D Peacock, X Gómez-Olivé, S A Lippman and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  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.

J PulerwitzHIV and AIDS Program, Population Council, Washington, DC, USA. jpulerwitz@popcouncil.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5177-1508
A GottertHIV and AIDS Program, Population Council, Washington, DC, USA.
K KahnMRC/Wits Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Research Unit (Agincourt), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
N HaberlandPoverty, Gender, and Youth Program, Population Council, New York, USA.
A JulienDepartment of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.
A SelinDepartment of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.
R TwineMRC/Wits Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Research Unit (Agincourt), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
D PeacockPromundo-US, Washington, DC, USA.
X Gómez-OlivéMRC/Wits Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Research Unit (Agincourt), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
S A LippmanMRC/Wits Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Research Unit (Agincourt), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
A PettiforMRC/Wits Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Research Unit (Agincourt), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Funding

Ujima Mentoring ProgramP30MH062246 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Sheri Ann Lippman · 2001 to 2026
$57.4M
Research Services CoreP2CHD050924 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI KAREN B GUZZO · 2015 to 2026
$9.6M
Activating Treatment as Prevention through Community Mobilization in South AfricaR01MH103198 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI LIPPMAN, SHERI ANN, PETTIFOR, AUDREY · 2014 to 2018
$3.1M
Effects of Cash Transfer and Community Mobilization in Young South African WomenR01MH087118 · NIMH · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI PETTIFOR, AUDREY · 2009 to 2013
$2.5M
NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD050924NIMH NIH HHS P30 MH062246NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH103198United States Agency for International Development Cooperative Agreement AID-OAA-140060United States National Institute of Mental Health R01MH087118United States National Institute of Mental Health R01MH103198
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How does the endorsement of different dimensions of gender norms by men and/or women influence their use of HIV testing and antiretroviral treatment? This question was examined using data from a 2014 population-based survey of 1053 women and 1004 men, ages 18-49, in rural South Africa. We used a global measure for views toward gender norms (the GEM Scale), plus four subsets of scale items (all reliabilities ≥ 0.7). In multivariate analyses using the global measure, endorsement of inequitable gender norms was associated with more testing (AOR 2.47, p < 0.01) and less treatment use (AOR 0.15, p < 0.01) among women but not men. When examining specific subsets of inequitable norms (e.g., endorsing men as the primary decision-maker), decreased odds of treatment use was found for men as well (AOR 0.18, p < 0.01). Careful attention to the role specific gender norms play in HIV service uptake can yield useful programmatic recommendations.

Indexed as

Decision MakingSex FactorsSocial NormsAdolescentAdultAntiretroviral Therapy, Highly ActiveData CollectionFemaleGender IdentityHIV InfectionsHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedRural PopulationSerologic TestsAntiretroviral treatmentGender normsHIV testing

Identifiers

PMID31359218
PMCPMC6773668

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.