↓ Skip to main content

Availability and acceptability of HIV counselling and testing services. A qualitative study comparing clients’ experiences of accessing HIV testing at public sector primary health care facilities or…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
147 Mendeley
Title
Availability and acceptability of HIV counselling and testing services. A qualitative study comparing clients’ experiences of accessing HIV testing at public sector primary health care facilities or non-governmental mobile services in Cape Town, South Africa
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2173-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sue-Ann Meehan, Natalie Leon, Pren Naidoo, Karen Jennings, Ronelle Burger, Nulda Beyers

Abstract

The South African government is striving for universal access to HIV counselling and testing (HCT), a fundamental component of HIV care and prevention. In the Cape Town district, Western Cape Province of South Africa, HCT is provided free of charge at publically funded primary health care (PHC) facilities and through non-governmental organizations (NGOs). This study investigated the availability and accessibility of HCT services; comparing health seeking behaviour and client experiences of HCT across public PHC facilities (fixed sites) and NGO mobile services. This qualitative study used semi-structured interviews. Systematic sampling was used to select 16 participants who accessed HCT in either a PHC facility (8) or a NGO mobile service (8). Interviews, conducted between March and June 2011, were digitally recorded, transcribed and where required, translated into English. Constant comparative and thematic analysis was used to identify common and divergent responses and themes in relation to the key questions (reasons for testing, choice of service provider and experience of HCT). The sample consisted of 12 females and 4 males with an age range of 19-60 years (median age 28 years). Motivations for accessing health facilities and NGO services were similar; opportunity to test, being affected by HIV and a perceived personal risk for contracting HIV. Participants chose a particular service provider based on accessibility, familiarity with and acceptability of that service. Experiences of both services were largely positive, though instances of poor staff attitude and long waiting times were reported at PHC facilities. Those attending NGO services reported shorter waiting times and overall positive testing experiences. Concerns about lack of adequate privacy and associated stigma were expressed about both services. Realised access to HCT is dependent on availability and acceptability of HCT services. Those who utilised either a NGO mobile service or a public PHC facility perceived both service types as available and acceptable. Mobile NGO services provided an accessible opportunity for those who would otherwise not have tested at that time. Policy makers should consider the perceptions and experiences of those accessing HCT services when increasing access to HCT.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 147 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 24%
Researcher 20 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 12%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 5%
Other 19 13%
Unknown 33 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 15%
Social Sciences 20 14%
Psychology 9 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 19 13%
Unknown 38 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 September 2015.
All research outputs
#6,716,307
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,997
of 14,870 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,712
of 267,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#140
of 328 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,870 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,079 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 328 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.