Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31682060›Full record

SynthesisHIV medicine2020

HIV testing strategies outside of health care settings in the European Union (EU)/European Economic Area (EEA): a systematic review to inform European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control guidance.

S Croxford, L Tavoschi, A K Sullivan, L Combs, D Raben, V Delpech, S F Jakobsen, A J Amato-Gauci, S Desai

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in HIV medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

S CroxfordNational Infection Service, Public Health England, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2220-623X
L TavoschiEuropean Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-2217-4664
A K SullivanNational Infection Service, Public Health England, London, UK.
L CombsCHIP, Rigshospitalet - University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
D RabenCHIP, Rigshospitalet - University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
V DelpechNational Infection Service, Public Health England, London, UK.
S F JakobsenCHIP, Rigshospitalet - University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-2586-0248
A J Amato-GauciEuropean Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, Stockholm, Sweden.
S DesaiNational Infection Service, Public Health England, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0185-7359
Public Health England · GBUniversity of Copenhagen · DKChelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GBEuropean Centre for Disease Prevention and Control · SEUniversity of Pisa · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIn recent years, new technologies and new approaches to scale up HIV testing have emerged. The objective of this paper was to synthesize the body of recent evidence on strategies aimed at increasing the uptake and coverage of HIV testing outside of health care settings in the European Union (EU)/European Economic Area (EEA).

methodsSystematic searches to identify studies describing effective HIV testing interventions and barriers to testing were run in five databases (2010-2017) with no language restrictions; the grey literature was searched for similar unpublished studies (2014-2017). Study selection, data extraction and critical appraisal were performed by two independent reviewers following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

resultsEighty studies on HIV testing in non-health care settings were identified, the majority set in Northern Europe. Testing was implemented in 65 studies, with men who have sex with men the risk group most often targeted. Testing coverage and positivity/reactivity rates varied widely by setting and population group. However, testing in community and outreach settings was effective at reaching people who had never previously been tested and acceptability of HIV testing, particularly rapid testing, outside of health care settings was found to be high. Other interventions aimed to increase HIV testing identified were: campaigns (n = 8), communication technologies (n = 2), education (n = 3) and community networking (n = 1).

conclusionsThis review has identified several strategies with potential to achieve high HIV testing coverage outside of health care settings. However, the geographical spread of studies was limited, and few intervention studies reported before and after data, making it difficult to evaluate the impact of interventions on test coverage.

Indexed as

Community-Institutional RelationsEarly DiagnosisEuropean UnionFemaleHIV InfectionsHIV TestingHomosexuality, MaleHumansMalePractice Guidelines as TopicadultsEuropeHIVHIV testingsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID31682060
PMCPMC7065225
OpenAlexW2983748217

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.