MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385975973 · doi:10.1371/journal.pgph.0001547

Assessing awareness and use of HIV self-testing kits after the introduction of a community-based HIV self-testing programme among men who have sex with men in Kenya

2023· article· en· W4385975973 on OpenAlexafffund
Souradet Y. Shaw, Stella Leung, Shajy Isac, Helgar Musyoki, Mary Mugambi, Japheth Kioko, Janet Musimbi, Kennedy Olango, Samuel Kuria, Martin K. Ongaro, Jeffrey Walimbwa, Memory Melon, Faran Emmanuel, Stephen Moses, James Blanchard, Michael Pickles, Lisa Lazarus, Robert Lorway, Marissa Becker, Sharmistha Mishra, Parinita Bhattacharjee

Bibliographic record

VenuePLOS Global Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanadian HIV Trials Network, Canadian Institutes of Health ResearchMedical Research CouncilBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsMedicineRespondentHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Poisson regressionMen who have sex with menFamily medicineDemographyEnvironmental healthPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Men who have sex with men (MSM) bear a disproportionate burden of new HIV infections in Kenya, while experiencing discrimination, leading to suboptimal levels of HIV care. HIV self-testing (HIVST) is a tool to increase HIV screening and earlier diagnosis; however, questions remain regarding how best to scale-up HIVST to MSM in Kenya. The main objective of this study was to examine changes in knowledge and use of HIVST after implementation of a community-led HIVST project. Participants were MSM recruited from Kisumu, Mombasa, and Kiambu counties. Data were collected from two rounds (Round 1: 2019; Round 2: 2020) of serial cross-sectional integrated biological and behavioural assessments (IBBA), pre-, and post-project implementation. Two main outcomes were measured: 1) whether the respondent had ever heard of HIVST; and 2) whether they had ever used HIVST kits. Changes in outcomes between IBBA rounds were examined using modified multivariable Poisson regression models; adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) are reported. A total of 2,328 respondents were included in main analyses. The proportion of respondents who had heard of HIVST increased from 75% in Round 1 to 94% in Round 2 (aPR: 1.2, 95% CI: 1.2-1.3), while those reporting using an HIVST kit increased from 20% to 53% (aPR: 2.3, 95% CI: 2.0-2.6). Higher levels of education and HIV programme awareness were associated with both outcomes. Awareness and use of HIVST kits increased after implementation of a community-led HIVST implementation project, demonstrating the importance of integration with existing community groups.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.114
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLOS Global Public HealthSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207