Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35259151›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2022

What are we learning about HIV testing in informal settlements in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa? Results from a randomized controlled trial.

Stephanie R Psaki, Julie Pulerwitz, Brady Zieman, Paul C Hewett, Mags Beksinska

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

5 authors.

Stephanie R PsakiPopulation Council/Project SOAR, New York, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0332-7653
Julie PulerwitzPopulation Council/Project SOAR, Washington, DC, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5177-1508
Brady ZiemanPopulation Council/Project SOAR, Blantyre, Malawi.
Paul C HewettPopulation Council/Project SOAR, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Mags BeksinskaMatCH Research Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-4169-4112

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent evidence highlighting high HIV incidence and prevalence in informal settlements suggests that they are environments that foster HIV risk. Given growing urbanization in sub-Saharan Africa, there is a critical need to assess the successes and challenges of implementing HIV testing, prevention and treatment interventions in these contexts.

methodsWe randomly selected a household-based sample of 1528 adult men (18-35) and women (18-24) living in 18 randomly selected communities in KZN, South Africa. After the baseline interview, communities were randomized to one of three intervention rollout arms in a stepped wedge design. At approximately 8-month intervals, the Asibonisane Community Responses Program (and in particular the implementation of Stepping Stones, a participatory HIV prevention program focused on strengthening relationships and communication) was rolled at by intervention phase. Using data from this evaluation, we describe levels and trends in HIV testing and treatment during follow-up, and we use fixed effects models to estimate the effects of participation in the program on testing.

resultsStudy respondents reported high levels of economic insecurity and mobility, and men report various HIV risk behaviors including about 50% reporting multiple partnerships. About two-thirds of respondents (73% of women, 63% of men) had been tested for HIV in the last six months. Among those living with HIV, treatment levels were high at baseline, and almost universal by endline in 2019. Program participation led to a 17% increase in the probability of testing for women (p<0.05) but had no effect on testing for men due, in part, to the fact that the program did not reach men who were least likely to be tested, including those who had migrated recently, and those who had never been tested at baseline.

conclusionsNear universal HIV treatment use demonstrates positive trends in access to some HIV services (including treatment as prevention) in these communities. Stepping Stones had positive effects on HIV testing for women, yet barriers to HIV testing remain, especially for men. Redoubled efforts to reach men with testing are vital for improving HIV outcomes for both men and their partners.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsAdultFemaleHIV TestingHumansMaleSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID35259151
PMCPMC8903271

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.