SynthesisPloS one2025
HIV self-testing and partner notification strategies for key populations in low- to upper-middle-income countries: A mixed-methods systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. 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.
- Epidemiological yield and cost-effectiveness of non-targeted community HIV screening in a low-prevalence district: a prospective quasi-experimental study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHIV self-testing (HIVST) enhances case diagnosis, but information on its integration for index testing to partner notification is limited. Assessing the acceptability and feasibility of index HIVST and partner testing among people living with HIV (PLHIV) and undiagnosed key populations is critical to ending the AIDS epidemic.
methodsA mixed-methods systematic review using a convergent segregated approach was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute's methodology. Four databases were used to conduct a literature review from October 2023 to March 2024, which included studies published between 2016 and 2023. Rayyan software was used for full-text screening. Meta-analysis was deemed infeasible; however, a qualitative meta-aggregation approach was conducted.
resultsA total of 4076 studies were retrieved, and 76 studies met the inclusion criteria after a full review. Most of these studies were from the African region, with only one from South Asia and a few from East Asia. Index HIVST and partner testing were found acceptable and feasible among PLHIV and key populations. Despite low partner elicitation ratios through assisted partner notification, a higher positivity rate was noted among notified individuals. Preferences for index HIVST and partner testing varied, with more inclination for assisted and passive partner referrals to overcome the risk of HIV status disclosure. Assisted partner notification (aPN) showed a low cost per infection averted, indicating it's a cost-effective intervention. Available evidence was skewed towards married couples, with less evidence on unmarried and undiagnosed key populations.
conclusionThe index HIVST was found to be acceptable and feasible in reaching index partners, including untested and undiagnosed partners of key populations, when various testing approaches are used. Understanding the index HIVST among unmarried HIV index cases, and partner testing of undiagnosed key populations is important, particularly in the Southeast Asian region, to bridge the current HIV case detection gaps. Although no specific cost-effectiveness studies were found for the index HIVST, the aPN was found to be cost-effective. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO Number: CRD42023475417 dated 2023. Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023475417.
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.