Increasing HIV testing and linkage to care among men in rural South Africa using conditional financial incentives and a decision support app: A process evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Men in sub-Saharan Africa are less likely to accept HIV testing and link to HIV care than women. We conducted a trial to investigate the impact of conditional financial incentives and a decision support application, called EPIC-HIV, on HIV testing and linkage to care. We report the findings of the trial process evaluation to explore whether the interventions were delivered as intended, identify mechanisms of impact and any contextual factors that may have impacted the trial outcomes. Between August 2018 and March 2019, we conducted in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with trial participants (n = 31) and staff (n = 14) to examine views on the implementation process, participant responses to the interventions and the external factors that may have impacted the implementation and outcomes of the study. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and translated where necessary, and thematically analyzed using ATLAS-ti and NVivo. Both interventions were perceived to be acceptable and useful by participants and implementers. EPIC-HIV proved challenging to implement as intended because it was difficult to ensure consistent use of earphones, and maintenance of privacy. Some participants struggled to navigate the EPIC-HIV app independently and select stories that appealed to them without support. Some participants stopped exploring the app before the end, resulting in an incomplete use of EPIC-HIV. While the financial incentive was implemented as intended, there were challenges with eligibility. The convenience and privacy of home testing influenced the uptake of HIV testing. Contextual barriers including fear of HIV stigma and disclosure if diagnosed with HIV, and expectations of poor treatment in clinics may have inhibited linkage to care. Financial incentives were relatively straightforward to implement and increased uptake of home-based rapid HIV testing but were not sufficient as a 'stand-alone' intervention. Barriers like fear of stigma should be addressed to facilitate linkage to care.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".