Correlates of HIV testing among men in Ghana: Cross-sectional analysis of the 2022 demographic and health survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction New HIV infections are on the rise in Ghana, with approximately 16,574 new cases reported in 2022 alone. Although HIV prevalence rate is higher among women aged 15–49 years (2.0 [1.7–2.3]) than men aged 15–49 (1.0 [0.8–1.2]) in Ghana, evidence form the country’s 2022 Demographic and health Survey suggest that only 12% of men had ever been tested for HIV once in their lifetime relative to 17% of women, and yet more men (35%) than women (23%) reported having sexual intercourse with persons who were neither their wife nor live-in partners. More so, the Ghana National HIV and AIDS Policy has over the years positively influenced the utilization of HIV testing (HIVT) services among women in Ghana through antenatal care visits. While this policy encourages women to undertake testing with their husbands, most men in the Ghanaian Context rarely accompany their spouse to antenatal care due to several reasons including conflicting work schedules, thus limiting their chances of getting tested. Using a nationally representative dataset, this study adds to the broader literature by exploring the factors associated with HIVT among men. Methods Using the 2022 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey ( N = 7044 males), and employing multiple logistic regression models, this study explored the factors associated with HIVT among men. Results Married men (OR = 1.723; p < .001), the employed, particularly, those paid in cash only (OR = 2.021; p < .001) and those paid both in cash and kind (OR = 1.823; p < .001), those who had knowledge of HIV test kits (OR = 1.708; p < .001), aware and approve to use Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) (OR = 1.1280; p < .001), as well as those who visited a health facility in the past 6 months (OR = 1.615; p < .001), all significantly reported higher odds of testing. Moreover, Educational attainment, age, household wealth, religion, ethnicity, and the region of residence significantly predicted HIVT in the study context. Conclusion Socio-demographic, economic, geographic and health-related factors have significant influence on the uptake of HIVT among men in Ghana, thus underscoring the need for tailored interventions that consider diverse contextual factors in HIV prevention and healthcare delivery.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".