Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31729150›Full record

SynthesisHIV medicine2020

HIV testing strategies employed in health care settings in the European Union/European Economic Area (EU/EEA): evidence from a systematic review.

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

Abstract 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 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

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

S DesaiCentre for Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control, Public Health England, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0185-7359
L TavoschiEuropean Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, Solna, Sweden.
A K SullivanDirectorate of HIV and Sexual Health, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
L CombsCHIP, Rigshospitalet - University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
D RabenCHIP, Rigshospitalet - University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
V DelpechCentre for Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control, Public Health England, London, UK.
S F JakobsenCHIP, Rigshospitalet - University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-2586-0248
A J Amato-GauciEuropean Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, Solna, Sweden.
S CroxfordCentre for Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control, Public Health England, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2220-623X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDespite the availability of HIV testing guidelines to facilitate prompt diagnosis, late HIV diagnosis remains high across Europe. The study synthesizes recent evidence on HIV testing strategies adopted in health care settings in the European Union/European Economic Area (EU/EEA).

methodsPreferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed and systematic searches were run in five databases (2010-2017) to identify studies describing HIV testing interventions in health care settings in the EU/EEA. The grey literature was searched for unpublished studies (2014-2017). Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction and critical appraisal.

resultsOne hundred and thirty intervention and/or feasibility studies on HIV testing in health care settings were identified. Interventions included testing provision (n = 94), campaigns (n = 14) and education and training for staff and patients (n = 20). HIV test coverage achieved through testing provision varied: 2.9-94% in primary care compared to 3.9-66% in emergency departments. HIV test positivity was lower in emergency departments (0-1.3%) and antenatal services (0-0.05%) than in other hospital departments (e.g. inpatients: 0-5.3%). Indicator condition testing programmes increased HIV test coverage from 3.9-72% before to 12-85% after their implementation, with most studies reporting a 10-20% increase. There were 51 feasibility and/or acceptability studies that demonstrated that HIV testing interventions were generally acceptable to patients and providers in health care settings (e.g. general practitioner testing acceptable: 77-93%).

conclusionsThis review has identified several strategies that could be adopted to achieve high HIV testing coverage across a variety of health care settings and populations in the EU/EEA. Very few studies compared the intervention under investigation to a baseline, but, where this was assessed, data suggested increases in testing.

Indexed as

Early DiagnosisEuropean UnionFemaleHealth PromotionHealth ServicesHIV InfectionsHIV TestingHumansMaleMedical StaffPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient Education as TopicPractice Guidelines as TopicadultsEuropehealth careHIV diagnosis and adultsHIV testing

Identifiers

PMID31729150
PMCPMC7065119

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.