Knowledge and attitude towards HIV/AIDS in India: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 47 studies from 2010-2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Several studies assessed the level of knowledge and general public behavior on human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immuno-deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) in India. However, comprehensive scrutiny of literature is essential for any decision-making process. Our objective was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the level of knowledge and attitude towards HIV/AIDS in India. Methods: A systematic search using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and free terms was conducted in PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar databases to investigate the level of knowledge and attitude of HIV/AIDS in India population. Cross-sectional studies published in English from January 2010 to November 2020 were included. The identified articles were screened in multiple levels of title, abstract and full-text and final studies that met the inclusion criteria were retrieved and included in the study. The methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute’s checklist for cross-sectional studies. Estimates with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each domain were pooled to examine the level of knowledge and attitude towards HIV/AIDS in India. Results: A total of 47 studies (n= 307 501) were identified, and 43 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The overall level of knowledge about HIV/AIDS was 75% (95% CI: 69-80%; I2 = 99.8%), and a higher level of knowledge was observed among female sex workers (FSWs) 89% (95% CI: 77-100%, I2 = 99.5%) than students (77%, 95% CI: 67-87%, I2 = 99.6%) and the general population (70%, 95% CI: 62-79%, I2 = 99.2%), respectively. However, HIV/AIDS attitude was suboptimal (60%, 95% CI: 51-69%, I2 = 99.2%). Students (58%, 95% CI: 38-77%, I2 = 99.7%), people living with HIV/AIDS (57%, 95% CI: 44-71%, I2 = 92.7%), the general population (71%, 95% CI: 62-80%, I2 = 94.5%), and healthcare workers (HCWs) (74%, 95% CI: 63-84%, I2 = 0.0%) had a positive attitude towards HIV/AIDS. The methodological quality of included studies was "moderate" according to Joanna Briggs Institute’s checklist. Funnel plots are asymmetry and the Egger’s regression test and Begg’s rank test identified risk of publication bias. Conclusion: The level of knowledge was 75%, and 40% had a negative attitude. This information would help formulate appropriate policies by various departments, ministries and educational institutions to incorporate in their training, capacity building and advocacy programs. Improving the knowledge and changing the attitudes among the Indian population remains crucial for the success of India’s HIV/AIDS response.
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 | 0.021 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".