Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36319030›Full record

SynthesisBMJ global health2022

Barriers and facilitators to HIV and syphilis rapid diagnostic testing in antenatal care settings in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

Ye Zhang, Rebecca Guy, Hawa Camara, Tanya L Applegate, Virginia Wiseman, Carla Treloar, Lise Lafferty

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ global health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. [Dual Test in Pregnant Women: Case of a General Zone Hospital with Family Medicine].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2026
    Observational
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Ye ZhangThe Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia yzhang@kirby.unsw.edu.au.
Rebecca GuyThe Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Hawa CamaraThe Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0470-6310
Tanya L ApplegateThe Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Virginia WisemanThe Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7911-0741
Carla TreloarCentre for Social Research in Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Lise LaffertyThe Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
UNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/T038837/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTesting and treatment during pregnancy is a well-established and cost-effective prevention strategy, which relies largely on use of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs). Yet, in many low-income and-middle-income countries, the uptake of RDTs is suboptimal. A qualitative meta-synthesis was conducted to identify the barriers and enablers to use of HIV and syphilis RDTs among pregnant women in low-income and middle-income countries.

methodsThis review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies included peer-reviewed publications, which used qualitative methods to explore HIV and syphilis RDT in antenatal care clinics in low-income and middle-income countries. Studies focusing on perspectives of pregnant women, healthcare workers and/or stakeholders were included. We used an inductive approach informed by a modified socioecological model to synthesise the data.

results62 manuscripts met the eligibility criteria. For pregnant women, initial acceptance of the RDT and continuation in antenatal care depends on the perception that engaging in testing will be a beneficial experience for their baby and themselves, often influenced by the provision of services that are gender-sensitive, confidential, respectful, flexible and considers their well-being into the future. Local sociocultural beliefs about pregnancy and diseases, awareness of diseases and gender roles in society also influenced RDT acceptability among pregnant women. For healthcare workers, the ability to provide high-quality RDT care required ongoing training, accurate and easy to use tests, support from supervisors and communities, sufficient resources and staffing to provide services, and reliable salary. At the stakeholder level, well-developed guidelines and health system infrastructures were imperative to the delivery of RDT in antenatal clinics.

conclusionOur findings highlight clear gaps to the provision of sustainable and culturally acceptable maternal HIV and/or syphilis screening using RDTs. In addition, greater attention needs to be paid to community stakeholders in promoting the uptake of RDT in antenatal clinics. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018112190.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsPregnancy Complications, InfectiousSyphilisDeveloping CountriesFemaleHumansMass ScreeningPregnancyPrenatal CareInfections, diseases, disorders, injuriesMaternal healthQualitative studySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36319030
PMCPMC9628546
OpenAlexW4308021242

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.