Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32999052›Full record

ReviewBMJ global health2020

Understanding and comparing HIV-related law and policy environments: cross-national data and accountability for the global AIDS response.

Matthew M Kavanagh, Ellie Graeden, Mara Pillinger, Renu Singh, Stephanie Eaneff, Victoria Bendaud, Rico Gustav, Taavi Erkkola

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ global health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Global Legal Environment for LGBTQ+ Sexuality and Public Health.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Recent South African court rulings on failing to disclose HIV status to sexual partners.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. 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

8 authors.

Matthew M KavanaghO'Neill Institute for National & Global Health Law, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA matthew.kavanagh@georgetown.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-1751-4828
Ellie GraedenTalus Analytics, Boulder, CO, USA.
Mara PillingerO'Neill Institute for National & Global Health Law, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
Renu SinghO'Neill Institute for National & Global Health Law, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
Stephanie EaneffTalus Analytics, Boulder, CO, USA.
Victoria BendaudUNAIDS, Geneva, Switzerland.
Rico GustavGlobal Network of People Living with HIV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Taavi ErkkolaUNAIDS, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Law and policy differences help explain why, as HIV-related science has advanced swiftly, some countries have realised remarkable progress on AIDS while others see expanding epidemics. We describe the structure and findings of a new dataset and research platform, the HIV Policy Lab, which fills an important knowledge gap by measuring the HIV-related policy environment across 33 indicators and 194 countries over time, with online access and visualisation. Cross-national indicators can be critical tools in international governance-building social power to monitor state behaviour with the potential to change policy and improve domestic accountability. This new and evolving effort collects data about policy through review of legal documents, official government reports and systematic review of secondary sources. Alignment between national policy environments and global norms is demonstrated through comparison with international public health guidance and agreements. We demonstrate substantial variation in the content of law and policies between countries, regions and policy areas. Given progress in basic and implementation science, it would be tempting to believe most countries have adopted policies aligned with global norms, with a few outliers. Data show this is not the case. Globally, alignment is higher on clinical and treatment policies than on prevention, testing and structural policies. Policy-makers, researchers, civil society, finance agencies and others can use these data to better understand the policy environment within and across countries and support reform. Longitudinal analysis enables evaluation of the impact of laws and policies on HIV outcomes and research about the political drivers of policy choice.

Indexed as

Acquired Immunodeficiency SyndromeHIV InfectionsHumansPolicySocial ResponsibilityAIDShealth policyHIVtuberculosis

Identifiers

PMID32999052
PMCPMC7528353

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.