Floyd, Sian; Molesworth, Anna; Dube, Albert; Crampin, Amelia C; Houben, Rein; Chihana, Menard; Price, Alison; Kayuni, Ndoliwe; Saul, Jacqueline; French, Neil; +1 more... Glynn, Judith R; (2013) Underestimation of HIV prevalence in surveys when some people already know their status, and ways to reduce the bias. AIDS (London, England), 27 (2). pp. 233-242. ISSN 0269-9370 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0b013e32835848ab
Permanent Identifier
Use this Digital Object Identifier when citing or linking to this resource.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To quantify refusal bias due to prior HIV testing, and its effect on HIV prevalence estimates, in general-population surveys. DESIGN: Four annual, cross-sectional, house-to-house HIV serosurveys conducted during 2006-2010 within a demographic surveillance population of 33 000 in northern Malawi. METHODS: The effect of prior knowledge of HIV status on test acceptance in subsequent surveys was analysed. HIV prevalence was then estimated using ten adjustment methods, including age-standardization; multiple imputation of missing data; a conditional probability equations approach incorporating refusal bias; using longitudinal data on previous and subsequent HIV results; including self-reported HIV status; and including linked antiretroviral therapy clinic data. RESULTS: HIV test acceptance was 55-65% in each serosurvey. By 2009/2010 79% of men and 85% of women had tested at least once. Known HIV-positive individuals were more likely to be absent, and refuse interviewing and testing. Using longitudinal data, and adjusting for refusal bias, the best estimate of HIV prevalence was 7% in men and 9% in women in 2008/2009. Estimates using multiple imputations were 4.8 and 6.4%, respectively. Using the conditional probability approach gave good estimates using the refusal risk ratio of HIV-positive to HIV-negative individuals observed in this study, but not when using the only previously published estimate of this ratio, even though this was also from Malawi. CONCLUSION: As the proportion of the population who know their HIV-status increases, survey-based prevalence estimates become increasingly biased. As an adjustment method for cross-sectional data remains elusive, sources of data with high coverage, such as antenatal clinics surveillance, remain important.
Download
Filename: articleviewer.aspx_year=2013&issue=01140&article=00012&type=abstract
Licence: Creative Commons: Attribution 3.0
Download