Fear of an HIV positive test result: an exploration of the low uptake of couples HIV counselling and testing (CHCT) in a rural setting in Mukono district, Uganda
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Couples HIV counselling and testing (CHCT) is a key preventive strategy used to reduce the spread of HIV. In Uganda, HIV prevalence among married or cohabiting couples is 5.6%, compared to 2.2% among those never married. CHCT can help ease disclosure of HIV positive status, which in turn may help increase opportunities to obtain social supports and reduce new infections. The purpose of this study was aimed at exploring the possible reasons for the low uptake of CHCT in Mukono district, a rural in setting in Uganda. METHODS: The study was conducted in two sub-counties in a rural district (Mukono district) using a descriptive qualitative research design. Specifically, we conducted four focus group discussions and 10 key informant interviews. We also interviewed 53 individuals in couple relationships. Data were collected mainly in the local language Luganda and English, all data were transcribed into English and coded for emergent themes. Ethical clearance for this study was obtained from the Mengo Hospital Research Review Board and from the Uganda National Council of Science and Technology. RESULTS: Fear of a positive HIV test result emerged strongly as the most significant barrier to CHCT. To a lesser extent, perceptions and knowledge of CHCT, mistrust in marriages and culture were also noted by participants as important barriers to the uptake of CHCT among couples. Participants offered suggestions on ways to overcome these barriers, including peer couple counselling, offering incentives to couples that test together and door-to-door CHCT testing. CONCLUSION: In an effort to improve the uptake of CHCT, it is crucial to involve both females and males in the planning and implementation of CHCT, as well as to address the misconceptions about CHCT and to prioritise CHCT within health care systems management.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it