Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34185815›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2021

Youth-friendly HIV self-testing: Acceptability of campus-based oral HIV self-testing among young adult students in Zimbabwe.

Andrea L Koris, Kearsley A Stewart, Tiarney D Ritchwood, Daniel Mususa, Getrude Ncube, Rashida A Ferrand, Grace McHugh

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. On Campus HIV Self-Testing Distribution at Tertiary Level Colleges in Zimbabwe Increases Access to HIV Testing for Youth.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Andrea L KorisDuke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-4879-9216
Kearsley A StewartDuke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States of America.
Tiarney D RitchwoodDuke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States of America.
Daniel MususaBiomedical Research and Training Institute, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Getrude NcubeMinistry of Health and Child Care, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Rashida A FerrandBiomedical Research and Training Institute, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Grace McHughBiomedical Research and Training Institute, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Duke University · USBiomedical Research and Training Institute · ZWLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBMinistry of Health and Child Welfare · ZW

Funding

Social support to retain adolescents living with HIV in care and improve ART adherenceK08MH118965 · NIMH · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI RITCHWOOD, TIARNEY D · 2019 to 2023
$908k
NIMH NIH HHS K08 MH118965Wellcome Trust 206316/Z/17/ZWellcome Trust 206316_Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTargeted HIV testing strategies are needed to reach remaining undiagnosed people living with HIV and achieve the UNAIDS' 95-95-95 goals for 2030. HIV self-testing (HIVST) can increase uptake of HIV testing among young people, but user perspectives on novel distribution methods are uncertain. We assess the acceptability, perceived challenges, and recommendations of young adult lay counselor-led campus-based HIVST delivery among tertiary school students aged 18-24 years in Zimbabwe.

methodsWe purposively sampled participants from an intervention involving campus-based HIVST using lay workers for distribution. We conducted in-depth interviews (IDIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs) among young adults from 10 universities and colleges in Zimbabwe who: (1) self-tested on campus; (2) self-tested off campus; and (3) opted not to self-test. We audio recorded and transcribed all interviews. Using applied thematic analysis, two investigators identified emergent themes and independently coded transcripts, achieving high inter-coder agreement.

resultsOf the 52 young adults (53.8% male, 46.1% female) interviewed through 26 IDIs and four FGDs, most IDI participants (19/26, 73%) favored campus-based HIVST, describing it as a more autonomous, convenient, and socially acceptable experience than other facility or community-based HIV testing services. Despite general acceptability, participants identified challenges with this delivery model, including: perceived social coercion, insufficient privacy and access to post-test counseling. These challenges influenced some participants to opt against self-testing (6/52, 11.5%). Recommendations for improved implementation included integrating secondary distribution of test kits and increased HIV counseling options into campus-based programs.

conclusionsBarriers to HIV testing among young people are numerous and complex. As the number of new HIV infections among youth continue to grow worldwide, targeted strategies and youth friendly approaches that increase access to testing are needed to close the diagnostic coverage gap. This is the first study to describe young adult acceptance of campus-based delivery of HIVST by lay counselors in Zimbabwe.

Indexed as

HIV TestingPatient Acceptance of Health CareSelf-TestingAdultFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMaleYoung AdultZimbabwe

Identifiers

PMID34185815
PMCPMC8241036
OpenAlexW3176138239

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.