Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31490938›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Comparison of community-based HIV counselling and testing (CBCT) through index client tracing and other modalities: Outcomes in 13 South African high HIV prevalence districts by gender and age.

Simukai Shamu, Thato Farirai, Locadiah Kuwanda, Jean Slabbert, Geoffrey Guloba, Sikhulile Khupakonke, Suzanne Johnson, Nomea Masihleho, Julius Kamera, Nkhensani Nkhwashu

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
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 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Treatment-adjusted prevalence to assess HIV testing programmes.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Simukai ShamuFoundation for Professional Development, Health Systems Strengthening Division, Pretoria, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-2290-0515
Thato FariraiFoundation for Professional Development, Health Systems Strengthening Division, Pretoria, South Africa.
Locadiah KuwandaFoundation for Professional Development, Health Systems Strengthening Division, Pretoria, South Africa.
Jean SlabbertFoundation for Professional Development, Health Systems Strengthening Division, Pretoria, South Africa.
Geoffrey GulobaFoundation for Professional Development, Health Systems Strengthening Division, Pretoria, South Africa.
Sikhulile KhupakonkeFoundation for Professional Development, Health Systems Strengthening Division, Pretoria, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-3552-2429
Suzanne JohnsonFoundation for Professional Development, Health Systems Strengthening Division, Pretoria, South Africa.
Nomea MasihlehoUSAID Southern Africa, Pretoria, South Africa.
Julius KameraUSAID Southern Africa, Pretoria, South Africa.
Nkhensani NkhwashuFoundation for Professional Development, Health Systems Strengthening Division, Pretoria, South Africa.
Foundation for Professional Development · ZAUniversity of the Witwatersrand · ZA

Funding

PEPFAR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo increase HIV case finding in a Community-based HIV counselling and testing (CBCT) programme, an index client tracing modality was implemented to target index clients' sexual network and household members.

objectiveTo compare index client tracing modality's outcomes with other CBCT recruitment modalities (mobile, workplace, homebased), 2015-2017.

methodsTrained HIV counsellors identified HIV positive clients either through offering HIV tests to children and sexual partners of an HIV index client, or randomly offering HIV tests to anyone available in the community (mobile, home-based or workplace). Socio-demographic information and test results were recorded. Descriptive comparisons of client HIV test uptake and positivity were conducted by method of recruitment-index client tracing vs non-targeted community outreach.

resultsOf the 1 282 369 people who tested for HIV overall, the index modality tested 3.9% of them, 1.9% in year 1 and 6.0% in year 2. The index modality tested more females than males (55.8% vs 44.2%) overall and in each year; tested higher proportions of children than other modalities: 10.1% vs 2.6% among 1-4 years, 12.2% vs 2.6% among the 5-9 years and 9.6% vs 3.4% among the 10-15 years. The index modality identified higher HIV positivity proportions than other modalities overall (10.3% 95%CI 10.0-10.6 vs. 7.3% 95%CI 7.25-7.36), in year 1 (9.4%; 8.9-9.9 vs 6.5%; 6.45-6.57) and year 2 (10.6%; 10.3-10.9 vs 8.2%; 8.09-8.23). Higher proportions of females (7.5%;7.4-7.5) than males (5.5%;5.4-5.5) tested positive overall. Positivity increased by age up to 49y with year 2's increased targeting of sexual partners. Overall linkage to care rose from 33.3% in year 1 to 78.9% in year 2.

conclusionsIndex testing was less effective in reaching large numbers of clients, but more effective in reaching children and identifying HIV positive people than other modalities. Targeting HIV positive people's partners and children increases HIV case finding.

Indexed as

Residence CharacteristicsAdolescentAdultAge DistributionChildChild, PreschoolCounselingFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansInfantMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPrevalenceSex Distribution

Identifiers

PMID31490938
PMCPMC6730921
OpenAlexW2971802339

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.