Failure to Return for Posttest Counseling and HIV Test Results at the Prevention and Voluntary Testing and Counseling Centers of Douala, Cameroon: An Evaluation of a Routine Five-Year Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the magnitude and time trends in failure to return (FTR) rates and the relation between FTR and individual characteristics, tests procedures, waiting period for the results, and HIV test results among people who were screened for HIV in the prevention and voluntary testing and counseling centers (PVTCCs) of six district hospitals of the city of Douala in Cameroon, between January 2009 and December 2013. It was a retrospective analysis of medical records. Among the 32,020 analyzed records, the failure to return (FTR) rate was 14.3%. Overall, people aged 50 years and over, those tested between 2011 and 2012, and those tested in the PVTCC of Bonassama were less likely to return for their results. Significant factors associated with FTR included being a housewife, having a positive/undetermined/requiring confirmation result, and provider-initiated testing and counseling (PITC). There was an increasing trend for FTR in the PVTCCs of Bonassama, New-Bell, Nylon, and Cité des Palmiers. HIV testing and counseling services in Douala district hospitals must be reorganized such that individuals tested for HIV receive their results on the same day of the test. Also counselors need to better alert clients concerning the importance of returning for their test results.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".