| Title |
The effects of HIV self-testing on the uptake of HIV testing and linkage to antiretroviral treatment among adults in Africa: a systematic review protocol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-016-0230-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bernard Njau, Damian J. Damian, Leila Abdullahi, Andrew Boulle, Catherine Mathews |
| Abstract |
HIV is still a global public health problem. More than 75 % of HIV-infected people are in Africa, and most of them are unaware of their HIV status, which is a barrier to accessing antiretroviral treatment. Our review aims, firstly, to determine whether HIV self-testing is an effective method to increase the uptake of testing, the yield of new HIV-positive diagnoses, and the linkage to antiretroviral treatment. Secondly, we aim to review the factors that facilitate or impede the uptake of HIV self-testing. Participants will be adults living in Africa. For the first aim, the intervention will be HIV self-testing either alone or in addition to HIV testing standard of care. The comparison will be HIV testing standard of care. The primary outcomes will be (i) uptake of HIV testing and (ii) yield of new HIV-positive diagnoses. The secondary outcomes will be (a) linkage to antiretroviral (ARV) treatment and (b) incidence of social harms. For the second aim, we will review barriers and facilitators to the uptake of self-testing. We will search PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Web of Science, WHOLIS, Africa Wide, and CINAHL for eligible studies from 1998, with no language limits. We will check reference lists of included studies for other eligible reports. Eligible studies will include experimental and observational studies. Two authors will independently screen the search output, select studies, and extract data, resolving discrepancies by consensus and discussion. Two authors will use Cochrane risk of bias tools for experimental studies, the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for observational studies, and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) quality assessment tool for qualitative studies. Innovative and cost-effective community-based HIV testing strategies, such as self-testing, will contribute to universal coverage of HIV testing in Africa. The findings from this systematic review will guide development of self-testing policy in African countries. PROSPERO CRD42015023935. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Canada | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 140 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 35 | 25% |
| Researcher | 22 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 9% |
| Other | 9 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 20 | 14% |
| Unknown | 35 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 38 | 27% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 13 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 17 | 12% |
| Unknown | 43 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 18 May 2016.
All research outputs
#16,721,208
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,732
of 2,228 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,941
of 315,557 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#33
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,228 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 315,557 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.