↓ Skip to main content

Male circumcision and HIV infection among sexually active men in Malawi

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Male circumcision and HIV infection among sexually active men in Malawi
Published in
BMC Public Health, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2384-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Namuunda Mutombo, Beatrice Maina, Monica Jamali

Abstract

The HIV epidemic remains a major health challenge all over the world. In 2013, an estimated 35million people were living with HIV globally. Male circumcision is increasingly being adopted as a method of HIV prevention. WHO and UNAIDS have advised that male circumcision be added to current HIV interventions. Malawi is one of the countries hardest hit by HIV/AIDS with a prevalence rate of 11 % and male circumcision prevalence of 21.6 % in 2010. Prior to 2011, traditional male circumcision in Malawi was the dominant form of male circumcision, mainly for cultural and religious reasons. This paper looks at male circumcision as a prevention method against HIV by examining the relationship between male circumcision and HIV status among Malawian men. The data used were collected as part of the 2010 Malawi Demographic and Health Survey. The methodology used in the 2010 MDHS has been comprehensively described by the National Statistical Office of Malawi and ICF Macro. Our analysis is based on men aged 15-54 years who were tested for HIV and responded to questions on circumcision during the survey. Sixty one percent of the 7175 men interviewed in the MDHS, qualified for this analysis. The sample was weighted to ensure representativeness. Frequencies, cross-tabulations, univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were conducted. Differences in the prevalence of HIV infection among circumcised and uncircumcised men were determined with Chi-squared tests. There is no significant difference in HIV prevalence between circumcised (12 %) and uncircumcised men (10 %). Among circumcised men, age and number of lifetime partners are the dominant correlates of HIV status. Additionally, circumcised men who have had ritual sex are two times more likely (OR = 2.399) to be HIV+ compared to circumcised men who have never had ritual sex. This study has demonstrated that traditional male circumcision was not associated with HIV infection in pre-2010 Malawi. Among circumcised men, age and number of lifetime partners are correlates to HIV status while circumcised men who have had ritual sex are more likely to be diagnosed with HIV than circumcised men who have not had ritual sex.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 15%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Other 14 19%
Unknown 19 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 19%
Social Sciences 12 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 7%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 18 24%

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 09 September 2016.
All research outputs
#8,118,229
of 14,197,302 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,543
of 9,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,754
of 283,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#720
of 1,111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,197,302 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 283,719 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.