Expanding options for HIV testing: A process evaluation of a community-led HIV self-testing intervention among men who have sex with men in Kenya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Men who have sex with men (MSM) in Kenya continue to face barriers to HIV testing, which leads to delays in HIV prevention and care. An HIV self-testing (HIVST) intervention was implemented in three Kenyan counties to increase coverage and frequency of HIV testing among MSM communities with high HIV prevalence. The evaluation study examined how HIVST can increase testing among MSM who are unaware of their status by increasing coverage, frequency, and early uptake of testing and support linkages to prevention and treatment. We share results from the process evaluation of the intervention implemented in partnership with MSM-led organizations. Methods: For a 12-month period between August 2019 and July 2020, the project team conducted in-depth interviews with HIVST users, monthly meetings with programme implementation teams, and monthly monitoring data reviews. Polling booth surveys were also conducted with participants. The process evaluation explored the fidelity, feasibility, coverage, acceptability, quality, and effectiveness of the HIVST intervention. Results: An average of 793 MSM received 1,041 HIVST kits on a monthly basis through different distribution channels. Of those who received HIVST kits, 67% were distributed to infrequent testers and non-testers. Testing frequency among users increased to 82% for those who had a recent test during the previous three months, compared to 58% of HIVST non-users. There was a high linkage to care and treatment services (84%) among those who tested reactive for HIV at endline. MSM shared preferring HIVST kits because of its convenience and privacy. During the COVID-19 pandemic, adaptations to the intervention were made to support ongoing HIV testing and linkages to services. Conclusion: The introduction of HIVST in MSM-led HIV prevention programmes was feasible with high acceptability. The involvement of the MSM community in the design, implementation and evaluation of the intervention was a key factor to intervention success.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.026 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".