ArticleTropical medicine and infectious disease2024
Risk Screening Tools Could Potentially Miss HIV-Positive Individuals Who Seek Testing Services: A Secondary Program Data Analysis on the Performance Characteristics of an Adolescent and Adult HIV Risk Screening Tool in Uganda.
Article in Tropical medicine and infectious disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Improving HIV testing efficiency saves financial and material resources for health. We conducted a secondary data analysis of routinely collected HIV risk-screening program data in Uganda, from October to November 2019, to determine the performance characteristics of the adolescent and adult HIV risk screening tools in public health facilities. A total of 19,854 clients had been screened for HIV testing eligibility and tested for HIV. The overall positivity rate (cluster-weighted prevalence of HIV) among those screened was 4.5% (95% CI: 4.1-4.8) versus 3.71% (95% CI: 3.06-4.50) among those not screened. The sensitivity and specificity of the risk screening tool were 91% (95% CI: 89-93) and 25% (24.2-26), respectively. With screening, the number needed to test to identify one PLHIV was reduced from 27 to 22. Although risk screening would have led to a 24.5% (4825/19,704) reduction in testing volume, 9.3% (68/732) of PLHIV would have been missed and be misclassified as not eligible for testing. The cost saving per PLHIV identified was minimally reduced by 3% from USD 69 without screening to USD 66.9 with screening. Since the treatment-adjusted prevalence of HIV is dropping globally, overzealous use of risk screening tools to determine who to test or not carries the potential of missing PLHIV due to their limited specificity. We recommend the use of scientifically validated HIV risk screening tools, and a need to explore the use of HIV self-testing as a test for tirage to minimize misclassification of people who seek HIV testing services.
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.