ReviewBMJ open2024
Country uptake of WHO recommendations on differentiated HIV testing services approaches: a global policy review.
Review in BMJ open, 2024. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- HIV Seroprevalence and Screening Practices Among Cancer Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Single-Center Study From Türkiye.Journal of clinical practice and research · 2026Article
- Sex Differences in Advanced HIV Disease at Presentation in Care Among People Living With HIV in Latin America and the Caribbean.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2026Article
- Community-Based Rapid Testing for HIV in Europe and Central Asia: A Narrative Review of Models, Effectiveness, and Implementation Challenges.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Review
- Unlocking self-testing: predictors of HIV self-testing kit use among reproductive-aged women in tanzania; a multilevel analysis of the 2022 demographic and health survey.AIDS research and therapy · 2025Article
- Analytical and Clinical Validation of the ConfiSign HIV Self-Test for Blood-Based HIV Screening.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Beyond behavioural change: prioritising structural solutions to control bacterial sexually transmitted infections.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Review
- HIV-1 gp120 Interactions with Nicotine Modulate Mitochondrial Network Properties and Amyloid Release in Microglia.Neurochemical research · 2025Article
- A prospective multi-site study to evaluate the performance and usability of an oral fluid-based HIV self-test in Canada.BMC public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesIn 2015 and 2016, WHO issued guidelines on HIV testing services (HTS) highlighting recommendations for a strategic mix of differentiated HTS approaches. The policy review examines the uptake of differentiated HTS approaches recommendations in national policies.
methodsData were extracted from national policies published between January 2015 and June 2019. The WHO-recommended HTS approaches included facility-based testing, community-based testing, HIV self-testing and provider-assisted referral (or assisted partner notification). Other supportive recommendations include pre-test information, post-test counselling, lay provider testing and rapid testing. Descriptive analyses were conducted to examine inclusion of recommendations in national policies.
resultsOf 194 countries worldwide, 65 published policies were identified; 24 WHO Africa region (AFR) countries (51%, 24/47), 21 WHO European region (EUR) (40%, 21/53), 6 WHO Eastern Mediterranean region (EMR) (29%, 6/21), 5 Pan-American region (AMR) (14%, 5/35), 5 Western Pacific Region (WPR) (19%, 5/27) and 4 WHO South East Asia Region (SEAR) (36%, 4/11). Only five countries included all recommendations. 63 included a minimum of one. 85% (n=55) included facility-based testing for pregnant women, 75% (n=49) facility-based testing for key populations, 74% (n=48) community-based testing for key populations, 69% (n=45) rapid testing, 57% (n=37) post-test counselling, 45% (n=29) lay provider testing, 38% (n=25) HIV self-testing, 29% (n=19) pre-test information and 25% (n=16) provider-assisted referral. The proportion in each region that included at least one recommendation were: 100% AFR (24/47), 100% EMR (6/6), 100% AMR (5/5), 100% WPR (5/5), 100% SEAR (4/4) and 95% EUR (20/21). AFR followed by EMR included the highest number of reccomendations.
conclusionThere was substantial variability in the uptake of the WHO-differentiated HTS recommendations. Those in EMR included the most WHO-differentiated HTS recommendation followed by AFR. Countries within AMR included the least number of recommendations. Ongoing advocacy and efforts are needed to support the uptake of the WHO-differentiated HTS recommendations in country policies as well as their implementation.
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.