ArticlePloS one2020
Does peer-navigated linkage to care work? A cross-sectional study of active linkage to care within an integrated non-communicable disease-HIV testing centre for adults in Soweto, South Africa.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retention and Acceptability of a Linkage-to-Care Intervention Among Patients with Chronic Conditions in Rural South Africa.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- "This is an illness. No one is supposed to be treated badly": community-based stigma assessments in South Africa to inform tuberculosis stigma intervention design.BMC global and public health · 2024Article
- Factors Associated with HIV Testing among Male Students Who Have Engaged in Sexual Behaviour in Zhejiang Province, China.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2023Article
- The HIV Cascade of Care and Service Utilisation at Sex Work Programmes Among Female Sex Workers in South Africa.AIDS and behavior · 2022Article
- Leveraging HIV Care Infrastructures for Integrated Chronic Disease and Pandemic Management in Sub-Saharan Africa.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSouth Africa is the HIV epidemic epicentre; however, non-communicable diseases (NCDs) will be the most common cause of death by 2030. To improve identification and initiation of care for HIV and NCDs, we assessed proportion of clients referred and linked to care (LTC) for abnormal/positive screening results and time to LTC and treatment initiation from a HIV Testing Services (HTS) Centre before and after integrated testing for NCDs with optional peer-navigated linkage to care. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis two-phase prospective study was conducted at an adult HTS Centre in Soweto, South Africa. Phase 1 (February-June 2018) utilised standard of care (SOC) HTS services (blood pressure [BP], HIV rapid diagnostic testing (RDT), sexually transmitted infections [STI]/Tuberculosis [TB] symptom screening) with passive referral for abnormal/positive results. Phase 2 (June 2018-March 2019) further integrated blood glucose/cholesterol/chlamydia RDT, with optional peer-navigated referral. Enrolled referred clients completed telephonic follow-up surveys confirming LTC/treatment initiation ≤3 months post-screening. Socio-demographics, screening results, time to LTC/treatment initiation, peer-navigated referral uptake were reported. Analysis included Fisher's exact, chi-squared, Kruskal Wallis, and Student's T-tests. Thematic analysis was conducted for open-ended survey responses.
resultsOf all 320 referrals, 40.0% were HIV-infections, 11.9% STIs, 6.6% TB, and 28.8% high/low BP. Of Phase 2-only referrals, 29.4% were for glucose and 23.5% cholesterol. Integrated NCD-HTS had significantly more clients LTC for HIV (76.7%[n = 66/86] vs 52.4%[n = 22/42], p = 0.0052) and within a shorter average time (6-8 days [Interquartile range (IQR):1-18.5] vs 8-13 days [IQR:2-32]) as compared to SOC HTS. Integrated NCD-HTS clients initiated HIV/STIs/BP treatment on average more quickly as compared to SOC HTS (5 days for STIs [IQR:1-21], 8 days for HIV/BP [IQR:5-17 and 2-13, respectively] vs 10 days for STIs [IQR: 4-32], 19.5 days for HIV [IQR:6.5-26.5], 8 days for BP [IQR:2-29)]. Participants chose passive over active referral (89.1% vs 10.9%; p<0.0001). Participants rejecting peer-navigated referral preferred to go alone (55.7% [n = 39/70]). Non-LTC was due to being busy (41.1% [n = 39/95]) and not being ready/refusing treatment (31.6% [n = 30/95]). Normalised results assessed at referral clinic (49.7% [n = 98/196]), prescribed lifestyle modification/monitoring (30.9% [n = 61/196]), and poor clinic flow/congestion and/or further testing required (10.7% [n = 21/196]) were associated with non-treatment initiation.
conclusionSame-day treatment initiation is not achieved across diseases, despite peer-navigated referral. There are psychosocial and health systems barriers at entry to care/treatment initiation. Additional research may identify best strategies for rapid treatment initiation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.