Trial reportPloS one2022
Screening PLHIV for depression using PHQs: A RCT comparing non-selective with selective screening strategy within a primary health care facility in Uganda.
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 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integration of specialised mental health services in an HIV clinic in a low resource setting.BMJ open quality · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a Clinic-Level Intervention to Increase Anxiety and Depression Screening in an Urban HIV Clinic.AIDS and behavior · 2026Article
- Intimate partner violence, social support, and depression among women living with HIV in Wakiso District, central Uganda: findings from a sequential mixed-methods study.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Feasibility and acceptability of systematic screening for depression among people with HIV in Senegal: a qualitative study among various stakeholders.BMC psychiatry · 2026Article
- The Trend in Suicide Risk Among People with HIV Before, During, and After the COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdown.AIDS and behavior · 2025Article
- Integration of mental health and HIV service delivery in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review of effectiveness.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2025Review
- Mental health and its consequences in people living with HIV: A network approach.Brain and behavior · 2024Article
- Perceptions, facilitators and barriers to the implementation of interpersonal group therapy to treat depression among people living with HIV in Senegal: a qualitative study.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDepression is rarely screened for among People Living with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (PLHIV) although it is 2 to 3 times more prevalent among PLHIV than in the general population. In instances where depression is screened for using screening tools, it usually follows noticing depression risk factors. This practice of selectively screening for depression could be leaving some cases of depression unattended to. On the other hand, subjecting every client to screening tools (non-selective screening) offers every patient an opportunity to be managed for depression. However, this could require additional resources as compared to selective screening. We present and discuss results on whether non-selective and selective screening strategies differ in depression case detection, and in addition, we also present perceptions of the stake holders on the two screening strategies.
methodsThe study was conducted in Princess Diana Memorial Health Centre IV HIV clinic using a randomized controlled trial with a qualitative component. To determine whether there was a difference in depression case detection, consecutively sampled participants were randomly allocated to either non-selective or selective screening strategy. Participants allocated to selective screening were screened for depression using the patient health questionnaire (s) (PHQs) if they were at "crisis points". While those allocated to non-selective screening were screened regardless of whether the "crisis points" were noticed or not. The PHQ-2 and PHQ-9 were used in sequence. 326 PLHIV participated in the study. Outcomes of the MINI evaluation were analyzed for those with PHQ-9 scores of 10 or more to confirm major depressive disorder (MDD). Data was analyzed using the two sample Z-test for proportions with Stata 2013 software. To explore the perceptions of the stake holders, key informant interviews were performed with six stakeholders that experienced the study.
resultsCases of depression (PHQ-9 score ≥ 5) were more likely to be detected by the non-selective screening strategy 30.2% (49/162) compared to the selective screening strategy 19.5% (32/164) (difference in proportions 0.107, 95% confidence interval 0.014-0.200, Cohen's h = 0.25, P = 0.03). The stake holders thought it was important to screen for depression among PLHIV with preference to non-selective screening strategy.
conclusionEvidence from this data suggests that more cases of depression (PHQ-9 score ≥ 5) are likely to be detected with non-selective screening as opposed to selective screening.
trial registrationPACTR201802003141213 (name: comparison of routine versus selective screening for depression strategies among PLHIV attending Princess Diana Memorial Health Centre iv Soroti).
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.