Knowledge, Attitude, Behavior, and Practices Regarding HIV, Viral Hepatitis, and Sexually Transmitted Infections Among Migrants From Sub-Saharan Africa Living in Germany: A Multicenter Survey Protocol
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Migration has an impact on the epidemiology of viral hepatitis B and C (HEP) and HIV in Germany; migrants from sub-Saharan Africa (MisSA) in Germany are disproportionally affected by HIV. In the last 10 years, a total of 10%-15% of all newly diagnosed HIV cases were among MisSA; 20%-30% of them acquired HIV in Germany. Prevalence of HEP among MisSA in Germany is unknown, but Western Africa, from where most MisSA in Germany originate, reports the highest prevalence of hepatitis B worldwide. There is limited information on knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and practices (KABP) regarding HIV, HEP, and sexually transmitted infections (STIs), as MisSA are not reached with surveys targeting the general population. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to determine the HIV, HEP, and STI information and prevention needs of MisSA in Germany. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, cross-sectional, KABP survey regarding HIV, HEP, and STIs among MisSA living in Germany using convenience sampling. The study design was developed as a community-based participatory health research (CBPHR) project; HIV/STI-prevention specialists, key persons from MisSA communities, and HIV/STI researchers were involved in all steps of the research process. Trained peer researchers recruited participants in six study cities. Potential modes of survey administration were interview or self-completion, and the questionnaire was available in English, French, and German. Questions on knowledge about HIV, HEP, and STIs were presented as true statements; participants were asked if they had known the information before. Focus groups with MisSA were conducted to interpret results. Data collection took place from October 2014 to November 2016. RESULTS: Recruitment by peer researchers concluded with 3040 eligible participants. Data collection was completed in November 2016. We are currently analyzing the quantitative data and qualitative data from focus groups. We are conducting working group meetings to discuss the results in the respective study cities and to evaluate the application of participatory health research in epidemiological studies. First results are expected by the end of 2017. CONCLUSIONS: Working with peer researchers to collect data allowed accessibility to a diverse sample of MisSA and, particularly, allowed us to reach vulnerable subgroups, such as MisSA without legal status. The ability to access hard-to-reach groups is one of the big advantages of CBPHR. The active inclusion of the persons under study in the design of the study resulted in higher acceptance and ownership of the research project in the target community; this ultimately lead to better quality of collected data. Furthermore, the participation of MisSA in the development of study design and data collection assures a better understanding of the interests, needs, and living conditions of this group.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».