Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40333642›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2025

Programmatic mapping and population size estimation of key population in India: Method and findings.

Pradeep Kumar, Chinmoyee Das, Bhawani Singh Khushwaha, Saiprasad P Bhavsar, Shantanu Kumar Purohit, Arvind Kumar, Subrata Biswas, Nidhi Priyam, Lalit Singh Kharayat, Shajan Mathew and 19 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

29 authors.

Pradeep KumarNational AIDS Control Organization, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7638-1263
Chinmoyee DasNational AIDS Control Organization, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi, India.
Bhawani Singh KhushwahaNational AIDS Control Organization, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8832-3626
Saiprasad P BhavsarNational AIDS Control Organization, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi, India.
Shantanu Kumar PurohitNational AIDS Control Organization, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi, India.
Arvind KumarNational AIDS Control Organization, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi, India.
Subrata BiswasNational AIDS Control Organization, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi, India.
Nidhi PriyamNational AIDS Control Organization, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-0209-6829
Lalit Singh KharayatUNAIDS, Delhi, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-1651-7098
Shajan MathewUNAIDS, Delhi, India.
Akhilesh SrivastavaUNAIDS, Delhi, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-8630-0742
Jyotsana PalUNAIDS, Delhi, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-5008-6359
Shreena RamanathanUNAIDS, Delhi, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8329-1805
Abhina AherUSAID, Delhi, India.
Deepika Srivastava JoshiUSAID, Delhi, India.
Rajatashuvra AdhikaryWHO, Delhi, India.
Shajy IsacIndia Health Action Trust, Delhi, India.
H Sanayaima DeviRegional Institute of Medical Sciences, Imphal, India.
P V M LakshmiPostgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
Elangovan ArumugamIndian Council of Medical Research, National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4491-7171
Sanjay K RaiAll India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Sheela V GodboleIndian Council of Medical Research, National AIDS Research Institute, Pune, India.
S K SinghInternational Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai, India.
Himanshu K ChaturvediIndian Council of Medical Research, National Institute of Medical Statistics, New Delhi, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9395-8522
Shanta DuttaIndian Council of Medical Research, National Institute of Cholera and Enteric Diseases, Kolkata, India.
Shashi KantAll India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Dandu Chandra Sekhar ReddyInstitute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India.
Sanjay MehendalePD Hinduja Hospital and Medical Research Center, Mumbai, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2191-4034
Shobini RajanNational AIDS Control Organization, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6109-538X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

India has the world's second-largest HIV burden. Key populations of female sex workers (FSW), men who have sex with men (MSM), hijra/transgender (H/TG) people, and people who inject drugs (PWID), are disproportionately affected by the HIV epidemic. A community-led programmatic mapping and population size estimation (PMPSE) was carried out in 651 districts of 32 States and Union Territories of India. The goal was to identify the hotspots, network operators, and estimate the size of key population groups. This involved documenting the known hotspots, visiting them for rapid field assessment through key informants'/ network operators interviews, and identifying additional hotspots/ network operators through the snow-balling approach from the existing hotspots. For each identified hotspot, network operator, and village, size of each key population group was estimated after adjusting for the duplications and overlaps. These estimates were then aggregated to arrive at district, State, and ultimately national-level estimates. PMPSE estimated a total of 9,95,499 (9,02,277-10,88,712) FSWs, 3,51,020 (3,13,860-3,88,175) MSM, 2,88,717 (2,53,024-3,24,407) PWIDs, and 96,193 (85,206-1,07,174) H/TG individuals. The number of FSWs per 1000 adult women in different States/Union Territories (UT) varied from 0.34 to 17.25; MSM estimates ranged from 0.07 to 7.35 per 1000 adult men, H/TG persons ranged from 0.03 to 2.75 per 1000 adult men, and PWIDs ranged from 0.01 to 31.30 per 1000 adult men. Additionally, approximately 14% of FSWs, 7% of MSM, and 8% of H/TG individuals were estimated to operate exclusively through network operators. The community-led PMPSE has updated the size estimates for FSWs, MSM, PWIDs, and H/TG individuals at a granular level. This approach has emphatically quantified the presence of network operators. The methodological simplicity of the present round of PMPSE is likely to encourage and facilitate its periodic implementation for better tracking of population level changes in HIV burden based on more reliable denominators.

Identifiers

PMID40333642
PMCPMC12057993

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.