Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34560853›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2021

Test@work: evaluation of workplace HIV testing for construction workers using the RE-AIM framework.

Wendy Jones, Sarah Somerset, Catrin Evans, Katharine Whittingham, Matthew Middleton, Holly Blake

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04292002 (Test@Work), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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.

NCT04292002 nacompletednot on this map

Test@Work: Evaluation of Attitudes and Uptake Within Employee Health Checks in the Construction Industry

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of NottinghamRan2019 to 2021Enrolled456ConditionsHIVArmsTest@Work
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Voluntary HIV Testing and Counselling Initiatives in Occupational Settings: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Wendy JonesSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Sarah SomersetSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Catrin EvansSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Katharine WhittinghamSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Matthew MiddletonSchool of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Holly BlakeSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. holly.blake@nottingham.ac.uk.
University of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCommunity testing for HIV can reach previously untested populations but is rarely offered in workplaces. Targeting the construction sector could reach workers from high risk populations.

methodsThe RE-AIM framework was used to evaluate Test@Work, a workplace HIV testing intervention for construction workers implemented at 21 events (10 companies) in the UK. Test@Work had three components: 1) an online health toolkit to inform managers about health screening and HIV testing; 2) general health checks; and 3) opt-in HIV consultation and testing. Quantitative data were collected using registration and exit questionnaires with workers (n = 426) and pre/post-event questionnaires with managers (n = 15), with qualitative analysis of free text responses.

resultsReach 426 individuals had health checks. Participants were broadly representative of the UK construction workforce, but with a higher proportion of permanent workers. Most workers reported being in good health but also believed their work had an adverse impact on their health. Effectiveness: 97% of health check participants opted to have a consultation about sexual health (n = 413) and 82% had an HIV test (n = 348), of whom 78% had not previously been tested. All HIV tests were non-reactive. HIV testing at work was considered acceptable by most participants. Participants reported learning new things about their health (74%), said they would make changes as a result (70%) and felt confident of success (median score 8/10). Adoption: Recruitment of companies was challenging and time consuming. Seven of the participating companies were very large, employing over 1000 workers, which is atypical of construction generally. IMPLEMENTATION: All events were completed as planned and were considered successful by all parties. Maintenance: All managers would arrange further events if they were offered them. Six managers incorporated sexual health awareness into their health programmes, but this was not possible for many as health agendas were set centrally by their organisations.

conclusionsOpt-in HIV testing, when embedded within a general health check, has high uptake and acceptability in the UK construction sector, and reaches individuals at risk for HIV who may not otherwise attend for testing. Cost-effectiveness of this approach is yet to be determined.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04292002 .

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsText MessagingHIV TestingHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesWorkplaceConstructionHealth checksHealth promotionHIV testingOccupational healthRE-AIMWorkplace

Identifiers

PMID34560853
PMCPMC8464147
OpenAlexW3201125353

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.