Women living with HIV and dual contraceptive use in Ethiopia: systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite different preventive strategies that have been implemented in the country, the prevalence of HIV/AIDS is still significantly increasing in Ethiopia. The concurrence of HIV and unintended pregnancy makes the use of dual contraception a back bone for the simultaneous protection against HIV, and unintended pregnancy. As a result, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the prevalence and associated factors of dual contraceptive use among women living with HIV in Ethiopia.We used databases; (PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, African Online Journals, and Hinary), other gray and online repository accessed studies were searched using different search engines. For critical appraisal of studies Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) was used. The analysis was done using STATA 11 software. The Cochran Q test and I2 test statistics were used to assess the heterogeneity. To detect publication bias funnel plot and Egger's test were used. The pooled prevalence of dual contraception use and the odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval was presented by using forest plots.Eleven studies were included in this review, with a total of 4083 women living with HIV in Ethiopia. The pooled prevalence of dual contraception use in Ethiopia was 34.08% (95%CI: 20.77-47.38). Having open partner discussion (OR = 3.96, 95%CI:2.3,6.8), provision of post test counseling (AOR = 4.38, 95%CI:2.93,6.54), disclosed HIV status to sexual partners (OR = 5.9, 95%CI:4.19,8.33), partner involvement in post-test counseling (OR = 3.52, 95%CI:2.37,5.23), and being on highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) (OR = 2.9, 95%CI:1.56,5.46) were the determinant factors of dual contraceptive use in Ethiopia.The overall prevalence of dual contraceptive use among women living with HIV in Ethiopia was low. Having open partner discussion, provision of post-test counseling, disclosed HIV status to sexual partner, partner involvement in post-test counseling, and currently on highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) were the associated factors of dual contraceptive use. Therefore, efforts should be made to provide post-test counseling, and initiate partner involvement in post-test counseling. Moreover, promoting open partner discussion, counseling to disclose HIV status to their sexual partner and to start HAART will be helpful in enhancing the use of dual contraceptive method use.
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 | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.029 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".