ArticlePloS one2022
Acceptability of unsupervised peer-based distribution of HIV oral self-testing for the hard-to-reach in rural KwaZulu Natal, South Africa: Results from a demonstration study.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Linkage to care and prevention after HIV self-testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2024Pooled it
- Social network-based approaches to HIV testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2024Pooled it
- Social network strategies to distribute HIV self-testing kits: a global systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2024Pooled it
- Social network distribution of HIV self-tests among MSM in Australia: a prospective, non-randomised trial.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2026Article
- Feasibility, acceptability and preliminary effects of a social network-based, peer-led HIV self-testing intervention among men in two Ugandan fishing communities, 2022.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- Stakeholder considerations on acceptability and implementation of a novel rapid test for acute HIV infection: A qualitative study in Indiana.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Assessing hepatitis C self-testing within differentiated care models in Cameroon: Feasibility, acceptability, and linkage to care for key and priority populations.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Stakeholder-engaged development of a rapid test for detection of acute HIV infection.Research square · 2024Article
- Article
- Social Network Strategies to Distribute HIV Self-testing Kits: A Global Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023Article
- Uptake of HIV Self-Testing and Associated Factors Among Female Sex Workers at Non-Governmental HIV Testing Facilities in Debre Markos and Bahir Dar Towns, Northwest Ethiopia, 2022.HIV/AIDS (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInnovative models to distribute oral HIV self-tests (HIVST) provide an opportunity to increase access to HIV testing, especially for hard-to-reach populations. This study aimed to describe the acceptability of unsupervised peer-distribution of HIVST as a method to scale-up HIV testing.
methodsIn this study, lay counsellors or community health workers provided HIVST kits to primary recipients (PRs) for distribution to their sexual partners, anyone in their social network (termed secondary recipients) or for self-testing, from September 2018 to March 2020. The study was conducted in Eshowe and Mbongolwane areas in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. A structured questionnaire was administered during the recruitment and passive follow-up, when people came for confirmatory HIV testing. Electronic records were retrospectively examined to determine initiation of antiretroviral treatment (ART) for all HIVST users and non-users.
resultsAmong 36,708 people approached to be primary recipients, 9,891 (26.9%) accepted; 31,341 HIVST kits were distributed with a median of three (IQR: 2-4) per peer. PRs were predominately recruited at primary health clinics (PHCs). However, acceptability of HIVST was thrice as high at community-based testing sites compared to PHCs (64.5% vs. 21.0%; p<0.001). During the study period, 34,715 adults were tested for HIV at both PHCs and community-based testing sites; of these, 1,089 individuals reported HIVST use. Among HIVST users, 893 (82.0%) returned to the clinic for confirmatory testing after testing negative on HIVST; 196 (17.9%) were confirmed HIV positive following a positive HIVST. After excluding 36/196 (18.4%) participants for whom clinical records could not be found in electronic register and 25/160 (15.6%) who were already on ART before receiving HIVST, 129/135 (95.5%) initiated ART, whereas 2,362/2685 (88%) of HIV positive HIVST non-users-initiated ART.
conclusionUnsupervised peer-distribution of HIVST was feasible and acceptable, with more than 25% accepting to be peer-distributors. Acceptability of HIVST was thrice as high in community sites compared to clinics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.