Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34341021›Full record

ReviewBMJ global health2021

Law, criminalisation and HIV in the world: have countries that criminalise achieved more or less successful pandemic response?

Matthew M Kavanagh, Schadrac C Agbla, Marissa Joy, Kashish Aneja, Mara Pillinger, Alaina Case, Ngozi A Erondu, Taavi Erkkola, Ellie Graeden

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ global health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The next viral pandemic-where do we stand?Folia microbiologica · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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
  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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Matthew M KavanaghDepartment of International Health, Georgetown University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA matthew.kavanagh@georgetown.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-1751-4828
Schadrac C AgblaDepartment of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Marissa JoyO'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Kashish AnejaO'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Mara PillingerO'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Alaina CaseTalus Analytics, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
Ngozi A EronduO'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0268-6838
Taavi ErkkolaStrategic Information Department, Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), Geneve, Switzerland.
Ellie GraedenTalus Analytics, Boulder, Colorado, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1265-9756
Georgetown University · USJoint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS · CHUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How do choices in criminal law and rights protections affect disease-fighting efforts? This long-standing question facing governments around the world is acute in the context of pandemics like HIV and COVID-19. The Global AIDS Strategy of the last 5 years sought to prevent mortality and HIV transmission in part through ensuring people living with HIV (PLHIV) knew their HIV status and could suppress the HIV virus through antiretroviral treatment. This article presents a cross-national ecological analysis of the relative success of national AIDS responses under this strategy, where laws were characterised by more or less criminalisation and with varying rights protections. In countries where same-sex sexual acts were criminalised, the portion of PLHIV who knew their HIV status was 11% lower and viral suppression levels 8% lower. Sex work criminalisation was associated with 10% lower knowledge of status and 6% lower viral suppression. Drug use criminalisation was associated with 14% lower levels of both. Criminalising all three of these areas was associated with approximately 18%-24% worse outcomes. Meanwhile, national laws on non-discrimination, independent human rights institutions and gender-based violence were associated with significantly higher knowledge of HIV status and higher viral suppression among PLHIV. Since most countries did not achieve 2020 HIV goals, this ecological evidence suggests that law reform may be an important tool in speeding momentum to halt the pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19HIV InfectionsHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Sex Workhealth policyHIV

Identifiers

PMID34341021
PMCPMC8330576
OpenAlexW3172229220

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.