Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32790677›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Lessons from the evaluation of the South African National Female Condom Programme.

Mags Beksinska, Phumla Nkosi, Zonke Mabude, Joanne E Mantell, Bongiwe Zulu, Cecilia Milford, Jennifer A Smit

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The Social, Behavioral, and Ethical Modalities of COVID-19 on HIV Care in South Africa: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Mags BeksinskaMatCH Research Unit (MRU), Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-4169-4112
Phumla NkosiMatCH Research Unit (MRU), Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Zonke MabudeMatCH Research Unit (MRU), Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Joanne E MantellDivision of Gender, Department of Psychiatry, HIV Center for Clinical and Behavioral Studies, Sexuality and Health, New York State Psychiatric Institute and Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York, United States of America.
Bongiwe ZuluMatCH Research Unit (MRU), Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Cecilia MilfordMatCH Research Unit (MRU), Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-0026-7560
Jennifer A SmitMatCH Research Unit (MRU), Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
University of the Witwatersrand · ZANew York Psychoanalytic Society and Institute · US

Funding

The Statistics, Data Science, and Data Management (SDM) CoreP30MH043520 · NIMH · NEW YORK STATE PSYCHIATRIC INSTITUTE DBA RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR MENTAL HYGIENE, INC · PI Claude Ann Mellins · 2003 to 2026
$48.2M
NIMH NIH HHS P30 MH043520
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnderstanding of the facilitators and challenges to female condom (FC) uptake has been limited due to lack of evaluation of national FC programmes.

settingThe FC has been an integral component of South Africa's (SA) HIV prevention programme for 20 years and is the largest government-funded FC programme worldwide.

methodsThe national FC evaluation used a mixed-methods approach and consisted of key informant interviews and a telephone survey in a national sample of public and non-public sites. A sub-sample of sites participated in client and provider interviews, and a self-administered client survey. A review of distribution statistics from South Africa's District Health Information System was also conducted.

resultsAll 256 public-sector and 28 non-public-sector facilities reported having ever distributed FCs. Less than 5% of these facilities reported stock-outs and less than 3% reported they had a supply of expired female condoms. Systems for male condom (MC) and FC distribution were complementary, with similar ordering, delivery and reporting processes. FC promotion by providers (n = 278) varied with regard to FC training, whether attitudes about FCs influenced providers offer of FCs, and how they counselled clients about FCs. Of the 4442 self-administered client surveys in 133 facilities, similar proportions of women (15.4%) and men (15.2%) had ever used FCs. Although FCs were available at almost all sites surveyed, only two-thirds of clients were aware of their availability.

conclusionData highlight the role of providers as gatekeepers to FC access in public and non-public sectors and provide support for further FC programme expansion in SA and globally.

Indexed as

Single-Use Internal CondomAdolescentAdultCondomsFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PolicyHIV InfectionsHumansMaleMiddle AgedNational Health ProgramsPrivate SectorPublic SectorSouth AfricaSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID32790677
PMCPMC7425948
OpenAlexW3049503799

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.