HIV self-testing in Rwanda: awareness and acceptability among male clinic attendees in Kigali, Rwanda: A cross-sectional survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Rwandan Ministry of Health recently (in February 2017) recommended the use of HIV self-testing (HIVST) as an additional strategy for hard-to-reach populations such as men. However, the level of awareness and acceptability of this testing strategy among this population in Rwanda is not known. The main objective of this study is to assess the level of awareness and acceptability of HIVST among male clinic attendees in Kigali, Rwanda. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was employed to systematically sample and interview 579 male health-facility attendees over a seven-week period. We employed a pretested interviewer questionnaire to collect data. The chi-square test was used to determine associations between explanatory variables. Univariate binary logistic regression analysis was carried out to obtain preliminary insight into the unconditional association of each independent variable and dependent variables (awareness and acceptability). Multiple logistic regression was employed to determine explanatory variables associated with awareness or acceptability status while adjusting for other study variables. All statistical analyses were performed using Stata version 11.2. RESULTS: Of the 579 men interviewed, only 21% were aware of HIVST, while 74% found it acceptable. Logistic regression analysis identified the following as factors significantly (p < 0.05) associated with HIVST awareness: having paid or received money for sex in the past month, health-seeking behavior, HIVST knowledge, HIVST attitude, and HIV risk perception. Factors associated with HIVST acceptability include the following: health-seeking behavior, HIVST knowledge, HIVST attitude, and condom use after taking drugs and alcohol. CONCLUSION: The findings reveal low awareness and high acceptability of HIVST among men in Rwanda. Our findings accentuate the need to promote awareness of HIVST as an important intervention for improving the uptake of HIV testing among men, a traditionally hard-to-reach population in Rwanda.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".