The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A randomized trial on acceptability of voluntary HIV counselling and testing
Open accessAbstract
Summary: Objectives To examine factors affecting readiness for and acceptability of voluntary HIV counselling and testing (VCT). Methods Participants in a population‐based HIV survey conducted in an urban population in Zambia in 1996 were offered VCT. Although 29% of them expressed interest in being tested (readiness), only 4% of this group used the services (i.e. acceptability). When the survey was repeated 3 years later, VCT was designed differently to assess acceptability. At the cluster level the participants were randomly allocated to VCT either at the local clinic (similar to 1996, n = 1102) or at an optional location (n = 1343). Results Readiness varied significantly by age group (47% in age group 20–24 years vs. 18% in age group 40–49 years). There were contrasts between young (15–24 years) and older age groups (25–49 years) regarding the main factors associated with readiness. Whereas self‐perceived risk of being HIV infected was the only significant factor among the young, poor self‐rated health and ever HIV tested were important factors among the older. The acceptability was 11.8% among the group allocated to VCT at the local clinic compared with 55.8% for the group allocated to an optional location (RR, 4.7). Conclusions Perceived risk of HIV infection had a major influence on VCT readiness among young people, whereas declining general health status, as indicated by self‐rated health, was most evident among those of older age. A strong effect of placement on acceptability of VCT was demonstrated, indicating this barrier to be important in explaining low demands for VCT in the past. Differences in perceptions of how confidentiality is handled at the two locations might be an important underlying factor.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Self-rated health and mortality: a review of twenty-seven community studies.
Idler, E. L., & Benyamini, Y. (1997) · Journal of Health and Social Behavior · doi:10.2307/2955359 · Cited by 8,598
Cited by
Sharma, M., Ying, R., Tarr, G., & Barnabas, R. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature16044 · Cited by 491
Acceptability of HIV self-testing: a systematic literature review
Krause, J., Subklew-Sehume, F., Kenyon, C., & Colebunders, R. (2013) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-735 · Cited by 332
Msuya, S. E., Mbizvo, E. M., Hussain, A., Uriyo, J., Sam, N. E., & Stray-Pedersen, B. (2008) · AIDS Care · doi:10.1080/09540120701687059 · Cited by 255
Metadata
- Authors
- Fylkesnes, K., & Siziya, S.
- Venue
- Tropical Medicine & International Health
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-04-29
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 566-572
- ISSN
- 1360-2276 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-3156
- OpenAlex
- W2031301058
- Cited by
- 221
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A randomized trial on acceptability of voluntary HIV counselling and testing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-3156.2004.01231.x
- The paper
- Fylkesnes, K., & Siziya, S. (2004). A randomized trial on acceptability of voluntary HIV counselling and testing. Tropical Medicine & International Health. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3156.2004.01231.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.