Suchergebnisse

n Too Big to Fail: Millennials on the Margins, the authors return to the question of how skills are distributed across the millennial population, focusing on the size and demographic characteristics of U.S. millennials with low literacy and numeracy skills, and the resulting impact on social and economic outcomes. They do this in part by examining the issue of "disconnected youth", a term typically applied to those ages 16-24 who are not employed or engaged in formal education or training. Since the Great Recession of 2008, researchers have become increasingly concerned with these disconnected youth who, according to some estimates, represent approximately 6 million young adults in the United States. The focus of this research has been on their educational attainment and labor market participation. While helpful, this approach is limited in two ways. First, it focuses on only our youngest adults at a time when the transition to adulthood is more prolonged. Second, it is based on the premise that employment and/or more education are assured catalysts for entry into the middle class and improving life outcomes. The authors question whether this assumption is appropriate to current circumstances; they suggest that looking at young adults only in terms of ties to the labor market or formal education may underestimate the scope of the challenges that we face and may skew our understanding of the policies needed to alter our course.

AbstractIntroduction: HIV self‐testing (HIVST) is a discreet and convenient way to reach people with HIV who do not know their status, including many who may not otherwise test. To inform World Health Organization (WHO) guidance, we assessed the effect of HIVST on uptake and frequency of testing, as well as identification of HIV‐positive persons, linkage to care, social harm, and risk behaviour.Methods: We systematically searched for studies comparing HIVST to standard HIV testing until 1 June 2016. Meta‐analyses of studies reporting comparable outcomes were conducted using a random‐effects model for relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals. The quality of evidence was evaluated using GRADE.Results: After screening 638 citations, we identified five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HIVST to standard HIV testing services among 4,145 total participants from four countries. All offered free oral‐fluid rapid tests for HIVST and were among men. Meta‐analysis of three RCTs showed HIVST doubled uptake of testing among men (RR = 2.12; 95% CI: 1.51, 2.98). Meta‐analysis of two RCTs among men who have sex with men showed frequency of testing nearly doubled (Rate ratio = 1.88; 95% CI: 1.17; 3.01), resulting in two more tests in a 12–15‐month period (Mean difference = 2.13; 95% CI: 1.59, 2.66). Meta‐analysis of two RCTs showed HIVST also doubled the likelihood of an HIV‐positive diagnosis (RR = 2.02; 95% CI: 0.37, 10.76, 5.32). Across all RCTs, there was no indication of harm attributable to HIVST and potential increases in risk‐taking behaviour appeared to be minimal.Conclusions: HIVST is associated with increased uptake and frequency of testing in RCTs. Such increases, particularly among those at risk who may not otherwise test, will likely identify more HIV‐positive individuals as compared to standard testing services alone. However, further research on how to support linkage to confirmatory testing, prevention, treatment and care services is needed. WHO now recommends HIVST as an additional HIV testing approach.

AbstractIntroduction: In accordance with global testing and treatment targets, many countries are seeking ways to reach the "90‐90‐90" goals, starting with diagnosing 90% of all people with HIV. Quality HIV testing services are needed to enable people with HIV to be diagnosed and linked to treatment as early as possible. It is essential that opportunities to reach people with undiagnosed HIV are not missed, diagnoses are correct and HIV‐negative individuals are not inadvertently initiated on life‐long treatment. We conducted this systematic review to assess the magnitude of misdiagnosis and to describe poor HIV testing practices using rapid diagnostic tests.Methods: We systematically searched peer‐reviewed articles, abstracts and grey literature published from 1 January 1990 to 19 April 2017. Studies were included if they used at least two rapid diagnostic tests and reported on HIV misdiagnosis, factors related to potential misdiagnosis or described quality issues and errors related to HIV testing.Results: Sixty‐four studies were included in this review. A small proportion of false positive (median 3.1%, interquartile range (IQR): 0.4‐5.2%) and false negative (median: 0.4%, IQR: 0‐3.9%) diagnoses were identified. Suboptimal testing strategies were the most common factor in studies reporting misdiagnoses, particularly false positive diagnoses due to using a "tiebreaker" test to resolve discrepant test results. A substantial proportion of false negative diagnoses were related to retesting among people on antiretroviral therapy.Conclusions: HIV testing errors and poor practices, particularly those resulting in false positive or false negative diagnoses, do occur but are preventable. Efforts to accelerate HIV diagnosis and linkage to treatment should be complemented by efforts to improve the quality of HIV testing services and strengthen the quality management systems, particularly the use of validated testing algorithms and strategies, retesting people diagnosed with HIV before initiating treatment and providing clear messages to people with HIV on treatment on the risk of a "false negative" test result.

AbstractIntroductionStrategies employing a single rapid diagnostic test (RDT) such as HIV self‐testing (HIVST) or "test for triage" (T4T) are proposed to increase HIV testing programme impact. Current guidelines recommend serial testing with two or three RDTs for HIV diagnosis, followed by retesting with the same algorithm to verify HIV‐positive status before anti‐retroviral therapy (ART) initiation. We investigated whether clients presenting to HIV testing services (HTS) following a single reactive RDT must undergo the diagnostic algorithm twice to diagnose and verify HIV‐positive status, or whether a diagnosis with the setting‐specific algorithm is adequate for ART initiation.MethodsWe calculated (1) expected number of false‐positive (FP) misclassifications per 10,000 HIV negative persons tested, (2) positive predictive value (PPV) of the overall HIV testing strategy compared to the WHO recommended PPV ≥99%, and (3) expected cost per FP misclassified person identified by additional verification testing in a typical low‐/middle‐income setting, compared to the expected lifetime ART cost of $3000. Scenarios considered were as follows: 10% prevalence using two serial RDTs for diagnosis, 1% prevalence using three serial RDTs, and calibration using programmatic data from Malawi in 2017 where the proportion of people testing HIV positive in facilities was 4%.ResultsIn the 10% HIV prevalence setting with a triage test, the expected number of FP misclassifications was 0.86 per 10,000 tested without verification testing and the PPV was 99.9%. In the 1% prevalence setting, expected FP misclassifications were 0.19 with 99.8% PPV, and in the Malawi 2017 calibrated setting the expected misclassifications were 0.08 with 99.98% PPV. The cost per FP identified by verification testing was $5879, $3770, and $24,259 respectively. Results were sensitive to assumptions about accuracy of self‐reported reactive results and whether reactive triage test results influenced biased interpretation of subsequent RDT results by the HTS provider.ConclusionsDiagnosis with the full algorithm following presentation with a reactive triage test is expected to achieve PPV above the 99% threshold. Continuing verification testing prior to ART initiation remains recommended, but HIV testing strategies involving HIVST and T4T may provide opportunities to maintain quality while increasing efficiency as part of broader restructuring of HIV testing service delivery.