ArticlePloS one2024
Feasibility and acceptability of a systematic offer of HIV rapid testing to Family Planning Centers visitors by non-physician professionals in France.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- How to Better Screen for Blood-Borne Viruses, Specifically HIV, in Hospital Emergency Departments: French and European Perspectives.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) epidemic remains active among women in Europe, with significant missed opportunities for HIV testing. Although HIV testing falls within the scope of Family Planning Centers (FPCs), it is often not offered. This pilot study assessed the feasibility and acceptability of systematically offering HIV rapid testing by non-physician professionals, independent of medical appointments, to visitors and accompanying persons in FCPs.
methodsIn September 2020, three FPCs in the Paris region were selected for a 6-month pilot based on high local HIV diagnosis rates among women and the absence of an existing HIV rapid testing offer. A dedicated midwife coordinated a certified training course for non-physician professionals, including group discussions on obstacles and facilitators for offering HIV rapid testing, education on HIV and the use of HIV rapid tests, and the development of procedures, including a standardized HIV questionnaire, to systematically offer HIV rapid testing. We measured participation rates in the study and acceptability of the HIV rapid testing offer. We analyzed visitor characteristics, HIV risk factors and knowledge about HIV.
resultsAll non-physician professionals across the three FPCs were trained. HIV rapid testing was systematically offered to 261 incoming visitors and accompanying persons from September 2020 to March 2021: 93% completed the questionnaire, and 91% accepted the HIV rapid testing offer; 63% reported prior HIV risk behaviors. Visitors born in North Africa had the least knowledge about HIV. Twenty-two visitors declined the testing offer, citing recent HIV testing, no perceived lack of risk, feeling unprepared, or fear of the outcome.
conclusionThe results demonstrate the feasibility and strong acceptability of systematically offering HIV rapid testing by non-physician professionals in large urban FPCs. Extending this approach to include sexually transmitted infections (STIs) screening could be beneficial.
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.