Assessing Outcomes in HIV Prevention and Treatment Programs With Female Sex Workers and Men Who Have Sex With Men: Expanded Polling Booth Survey Protocol (Preprint)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> Assessing HIV outcomes in key population prevention programs is a crucial component of the program cycle, as it facilitates improved planning and monitoring of anticipated results. The Joint United Nations Programme on HIV and AIDS recommends using simple, rapid methods to routinely measure granular and differentiated program outcomes for key populations. Following a program science approach, Partners for Health and Development in Africa, in partnership with the Nairobi County Government and the University of Manitoba, aims to conduct an outcome assessment using a novel, expanded polling booth survey (ePBS) method with female sex workers and men who have sex with men in Nairobi County, Kenya. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> This study aims to (1) estimate the incidence and prevalence of HIV; (2) assess biomedical, behavioral, and structural outcomes; and (3) understand barriers contributing to gaps in access and use of available prevention and treatment services among female sex workers and men who have sex with men in Nairobi. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> The novel ePBS approach employs complementary data collection methods, expanding upon the traditional polling booth survey (PBS) method by incorporating additional quantitative, qualitative, and biological data collection components and an improved sampling methodology. Quantitative methods will include (1) PBS, a group interview method in which individuals provide responses through a ballot box in an unlinked and anonymous way, and (2) a behavioral and biological survey (BBS), including a face-to-face individual interview and collection of linked biological samples. Qualitative methods will include focus group discussions. The ePBS study uses a 2-stage, population- and location-based random sampling approach involving the random selection of locations from which random participants are selected at a predetermined time on a randomly selected day. PBS data will be analyzed at the group level, and BBS data will be analyzed at an individual level. Qualitative data will be analyzed thematically. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> Data were collected from April to May 2023. The study has enrolled 759 female sex workers (response rate: 759/769, 98.6%) and 398 men who have sex with men (response rate: 398/420, 94.7%). Data cleaning and analyses are ongoing, with a focus on assessing gaps in program coverage and inequities in program outcomes. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> The study will generate valuable HIV outcome data to inform program improvement and policy development for Nairobi County’s key population HIV prevention program. This study served as a pilot for the novel ePBS method, which combines PBS, BBS, and focus group discussions to enhance its programmatic utility. The ePBS method holds the potential to fill an acknowledged gap for a rapid, low-cost, and simple method to routinely measure HIV outcomes within programs and inform incremental program improvements through embedded learning processes. </sec>
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 | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 ».