Social network‐based approaches to HIV testing: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Author:

Choong Annabelle12,Lyu Yi Ming12,Johnson Cheryl C.3,Baggaley Rachel3,Barr‐DiChiara Magdalena3,Jamil Muhammad S.4ORCID,Siegfried Nandi L.5,Fairley Christopher K.12,Chow Eric P. F.126ORCID,Macdonald Virginia3ORCID,Ong Jason J.127ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Central Clinical School Monash University Melbourne Victoria Australia

2. Melbourne Sexual Health Centre Alfred Health Melbourne Victoria Australia

3. Global HIV, Hepatitis and STIs Programmes World Health Organization Geneva Switzerland

4. Regional Office to the Eastern Mediterranean World Health Organization Cairo Egypt

5. Independent Clinical Epidemiologist Cape Town South Africa

6. Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health The University of Melbourne Melbourne Victoria Australia

7. Faculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine London UK

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionSocial network‐based testing approaches (SNAs) encourage individuals (“test promoters”) to motivate sexual partners and/or those in their social networks to test for HIV. We conducted a systematic review to examine the effectiveness, acceptability and cost‐effectiveness of SNA.MethodsWe searched five databases from January 2010 to May 2023, and included studies that compared SNA with non‐SNA. We used random‐effects meta‐analysis to combine effect estimates. Certainty was assessed using the GRADE approach.ResultsWe identified 47 studies. SNA may increase uptake of HIV testing compared to non‐SNA (RR 2.04, 95% CI: 1.06–3.95, Low certainty). The proportion of first‐time testers was probably higher among partners or social contacts of test promoters using SNA compared to non‐SNA (RR 1.49, 95% CI: 1.22–1.81, Moderate certainty). The proportion of people who tested positive for HIV may be higher among partners or social contacts of test promoters using SNA compared to non‐SNA (RR 1.84, 95% CI: 1.01–3.35, Low certainty). There were no reports of any adverse events or harms associated with SNA. Based on six cost‐effectiveness studies, SNA was generally cheaper per person tested and per person diagnosed compared to non‐SNA. Based on 23 qualitative studies, SNA is likely to be acceptable to a variety of populations.DiscussionOur review collated evidence for SNA to HIV testing covering the key populations and the general population who may benefit from HIV testing. We summarized evidence for the effectiveness, acceptability and cost‐effectiveness of different models of SNA. While we did not identify an ideal model of SNA that could be immediately scaled up, for each setting and population targeted, we recommend various implementation considerations as our meta‐analysis showed the effectiveness might differ due to factors which include the testing modality (i.e. use of HIV self‐testing), type of test promoters, long or short duration of recruitment and use of financial incentives.ConclusionsSocial network‐based approaches may enhance HIV testing uptake, increase the proportion of first‐time testers and those testing positive for HIV. Heterogeneity among studies highlights the need for context‐specific adaptations, but the overall positive impact of SNA on HIV testing outcomes could support its integration into existing HIV testing services.

Funder

United States Agency for International Development

World Health Organization

Publisher

Wiley

Reference77 articles.

1. UNAIDS.In danger: UNAIDS Global AIDS Update.2022. Accessed August 30 2024. Available from:https://www.unaids.org/en/resources/documents/2022/in‐danger‐global‐aids‐update

2. UNAIDS.Global HIV&AIDS statistics—fact sheet.2024. Accessed August 30 2024. Available from:https://www.unaids.org/en/resources/fact‐sheet#:~:text=85%25%20%5B75%E2%80%93%2097%25%5D living%20with%20HIV%20in%202021

3. World Health Organization.Guidelines on HIV self‐testing and partner notification: supplement to consolidated guidelines on HIV testing services.World Health Organization;2016.

4. World Health Organization.Consolidated guidelines on HIV testing services: 5Cs: consent confidentiality counselling correct results and connection.2015.

5. HIV Among Black Men Who Have Sex with Men (MSM) in the United States: A Review of the Literature

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3