ArticleAIDS (London, England)2020
Improving HIV outreach testing yield at cross-border venues in East Africa.
Article in AIDS (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unawareness of HIV Infection Among Men Aged 15-59 Years in 13 Sub-Saharan African Countries: Findings From the Population-Based HIV Impact Assessments, 2015-2019.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2021Article
- Index and targeted community-based testing to optimize HIV case finding and ART linkage among men in Zambia.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate HIV testing yield under several candidate strategies for outreach testing at venues (i.e. places where people socialize and meet new sex partners) in East Africa cross-border areas.
designPopulation-based cross-sectional biobehavioural survey of people who had not been previously diagnosed with HIV found in venues.
methodsWe identified participants who would have been tested for HIV under each of 10 hypothetical outreach testing strategies and calculated the proportion who would have newly tested positive for HIV under each strategy. On the basis of this proportion, we calculated the 'number needed to test' (NNT) to identify one new case of HIV under each strategy. All estimates were obtained by applying survey sampling weights to account for the complex sampling design.
resultsIf testing was performed at a random sample of venues, 35 people would need to be tested to identify one new case of HIV, but higher yield could be found by limiting testing to venues with specific characteristics. Strategies focusing on women had higher testing yield. Testing women employed by venues would result in highest yield of all strategies examined (NNT = 15), while testing men under age 24 would result in the lowest yield (NNT = 99).
conclusionQuantitatively evaluating HIV testing strategies prior to implementation using survey data presents a new opportunity to refine and prioritize outreach testing strategies for the people and places most likely to result in high HIV testing yield.
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.