Outreach Strategies for the Promotion of HIV Testing and Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Regular voluntary counseling and testing is a key component of the fight against HIV/AIDS. In Benin, the project SIDA-1/2/3 established to decrease HIV/sexually transmitted infection (STIs) among female sex workers (FSWs), implemented a multifaceted intervention, including outreach activities. The objective of this article was to present potential advantages and limitations of 3 categories of outreach interventions designed to increase the use of testing services among FSWs in Benin. METHODS: This analysis is based on ethnographic fieldwork conducted in Benin from June to December 2012. RESULTS: Sixty-six FSWs and 24 health care workers were interviewed. Their narratives revealed 3 main factors impeding the development of appropriate HIV testing behavior. These negative elements can be positioned along a continuum of health care behaviors, with each stage of this continuum presenting its own challenges: fear or lack of motivation to use testing services, inaccessibility of care when the decision to go has been made, and a perceived lack of quality in the care offered at the health care center. Many of these needs seem to be addressed in the outreach strategies tested. However, the study also exposed some potential barriers or limitations to the success of these strategies when applied in this specific context, due to social disruption, mobility, access to care, and hard to reach population. CONCLUSIONS: To increase the use of testing services, an outreach strategy based on community workers or peer educators, along with improved access to testing services, would be well adapted to this context and appreciated by both FSWs and health care workers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".