↓ Skip to main content

Use of a counsellor supported disclosure model to improve the uptake of couple HIV testing and counselling in Kenya: a quasi-experimental study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Use of a counsellor supported disclosure model to improve the uptake of couple HIV testing and counselling in Kenya: a quasi-experimental study
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5495-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Margaret Kababu, Eric Sakwa, Robinson Karuga, Annrita Ikahu, Inviolata Njeri, Jordan Kyongo, Catherine Khamali, Wanjiru Mukoma

Abstract

Heterosexual couples account for 44% of new HIV infections in Kenya and there's low awareness of self and partner HIV status. Different strategies have been employed to promote couple HIV testing and counselling (CHTC). Despite this, HIV incidence among couples continues to rise. This study sought to assess the use of a counsellor-supported disclosure (CSD) model in enhancing the uptake of CHTC and the factors that were associated with it. A pre-post quasi experimental study design with an intervention and a comparison arm was utilized. The study was conducted in Nairobi, Nakuru, Kisumu, and Homa Bay counties in Kenya. A total of 276 participants were recruited; 149 and 127 in the comparison and intervention arms, respectively. Standard HIV testing & counselling (HTC) was offered in the comparison arm whereas the counsellor-supported disclosure model was administered in the intervention arm. The model empowered index clients to invite their sexual partner for CHTC. Telephone follow-up and subsequent community health volunteer (CHV) follow-up for non-responders were embedded in the model. Semi-structured questionnaires were used to collect data at baseline and 3 months into the study. In-depth interviews were conducted with 15 participants who took up the intervention and 7 of the HTC providers who offered CSD. The quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed using STATA version 13 and NVIVO 10, respectively. Uptake of CHTC was 28% in the intervention arm of the study compared to 7% in the comparison arm (p < 0.001). Participants in the intervention arm of the study had eight times higher odds of taking up CHTC compared to their counterparts. The outcome of the qualitative interviews revealed that the CSD counselling, skills on partner invitation, and follow-up for partner invitation increased the uptake of CHTC. On the other hand, unwillingness to test together with partner, lack of availability to test together as a couple, and provision of the wrong contact information by the participants reduced the uptake of CHTC. The CSD model improved the uptake of CHTC. This model can be integrated into the existing HTC structures to enhance the uptake of CHTC.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 15%
Student > Master 13 14%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 8%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 27 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 22 23%
Social Sciences 11 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 11%
Psychology 6 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 30 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 July 2018.
All research outputs
#2,250,518
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,535
of 15,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,058
of 331,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#74
of 306 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,466 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,314 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 306 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.