Incidence of HIV disclosure among HIV affected heterosexual partners using a community health worker led mechanism in rural Uganda; a quasi-experimental study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: HIV disclosure is vital in HIV management. Community Health Workers (CHW) were reported to support partner disclosure among HIV affected heterosexual partners with disclosure difficulties. However, time to disclosure attributed to use of CHW led disclosure support mechanism was not documented. This study compared the incidence of sexual partner disclosure among adults living with HIV (ALHIV) with CHW support and those without in the greater Luwero region, Uganda. METHODS: We conducted a quasi-experimental study with two arms allocated by geographically determined clusters and adjusted for between-group differences; among ALHIV in the greater Luwero region of Uganda who had never disclosed to their current primary sexual partners. We allocated study clusters to either a CHW-led intervention or control arm. In both arms, we consecutively recruited participants; those in the intervention arm received CHW disclosure support in addition to routine care. The overall follow-up was six months, and the primary outcome was disclosure to the partner. We used survival analysis with proportional hazard ratios to determine the time to partner disclosure in both arms. RESULTS: A total of 245 participants were enrolled, and 230 (93.9%) completed the study; of these, 112 (48.7%) were in the intervention and 118 (51.3%) in the control arm. The mean age was 31 ± 8 years with a range of 18 to 55 years; the majority were females, 176 (76.5%). The cumulative incidence of disclosure was higher in the intervention arm, 8.76 [95% CI: 7.20-10.67] per 1,000 person-days versus 5.15 [95%CI: 4.85-6.48] per 1,000 person-days in the control arm, log-rank test, X2 = 12.93, P < 0.001. Male gender, aHR = 1.82, tertiary education, aHR = 1.51, and relationship duration of > six months, aHR = 1.19 predicted disclosure. Prior disclosure to a relative, aHR = 0.55, and having more than one sexual partner in the past three months, aHR = 0.74, predicted non-disclosure. CONCLUSION: CHW-led support mechanism increased the rate of sexual partner disclosure among ALHIV with disclosure difficulties. Therefore, to achieve the global targets of ending HIV, near location CHW-led disclosure support mechanism may be used to hasten HIV disclosure in rural settings.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".