Evaluation of a health education program for improving uptake of HIV self-testing by men in Rwanda: a pilot pragmatic randomized control trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health education interventions tailored to suit men have the potential to improve health outcomes for this underserved population. HIV self-testing (HIVST) is a promising approach to overcoming challenges associated with low HIV testing rates among men. The primary objective of this study is to assess the feasibility of conducting a definitive trial to determine the effectiveness of a locally adapted and optimized health education program (HEP) on the uptake of HIVST among men in Kigali, Rwanda. METHODS: This study employs a pilot pragmatic randomized controlled trial to evaluate an HIVST HEP for men. Participants were randomized to the intervention (HEP) arm or to the control arm. In the intervention group, the adapted HEP was administered in addition to routine health education. In the non-intervention group, only routine health education was offered. Participant data was collected first upon recruitment and then after 3 months' follow-up using interviewer-administered questionnaires. RESULTS: There was a 100% response rate at enrollment and no loss to follow-up at exit. There was significant association between the study arm and knowledge of HIVST. Participants in the control arm had a mean knowledge score of 67% compared to 92% among participants in the intervention arm. There was an association between the study arm and HIVST uptake: 67% of the study participants in the intervention arm self-reported HIVST uptake compared to 23% of the participants in the control arm. DISCUSSION: This pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of a larger trial to assess the effectiveness of an HEP intervention on uptake of HIVST among men. We found preliminary evidence of increased uptake of HIVST in the intervention group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pan African Clinical Trial Registry PACTR201908758321490 . Registered on 8 August 2019.
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 | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".