J E Anderson1, J W Carey, S Taveras. 1. Behavioral Intervention Research Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta 30333, USA. jea1@cdc.gov
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We used data from national surveys to measure the rate of HIV testing in the general US population and among persons at increased behavioral risk and summarized what has been learned about HIV testing from these surveys. METHODS: Three nationally representative surveys were used: the National Health Interview Survey for 1987 through 1995, the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth, and the 1996 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse. These surveys asked about HIV testing experience and behavioral risks for HIV. Rates of testing were computed for all persons, including those at increased risk for HIV. RESULTS: From 1987 to 1995, the percentage of adults ever tested increased from 16% to 40%. The 3 surveys were consistent with one another, and all showed much higher rates of testing for persons at increased risk for HIV. CONCLUSIONS: Surveys have provided information on HIV testing that is not available elsewhere, including rates of testing from private sources and public programs. Efforts to measure HIV testing and its correlates should continue and should be improved to provide information essential for effective programs.
OBJECTIVES: We used data from national surveys to measure the rate of HIV testing in the general US population and among persons at increased behavioral risk and summarized what has been learned about HIV testing from these surveys. METHODS: Three nationally representative surveys were used: the National Health Interview Survey for 1987 through 1995, the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth, and the 1996 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse. These surveys asked about HIV testing experience and behavioral risks for HIV. Rates of testing were computed for all persons, including those at increased risk for HIV. RESULTS: From 1987 to 1995, the percentage of adults ever tested increased from 16% to 40%. The 3 surveys were consistent with one another, and all showed much higher rates of testing for persons at increased risk for HIV. CONCLUSIONS: Surveys have provided information on HIV testing that is not available elsewhere, including rates of testing from private sources and public programs. Efforts to measure HIV testing and its correlates should continue and should be improved to provide information essential for effective programs.
Authors: J A Catania; T J Coates; R Stall; H Turner; J Peterson; N Hearst; M M Dolcini; E Hudes; J Gagnon; J Wiley Journal: Science Date: 1992-11-13 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Robert Heimer; Lauretta E Grau; Erin Curtin; Kaveh Khoshnood; Merrill Singer Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2006-11-30 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: J F G Monteiro; D J Escudero; C Weinreb; T Flanigan; S Galea; S R Friedman; B D L Marshall Journal: Epidemiol Infect Date: 2016-01-12 Impact factor: 2.451
Authors: H Irene Hall; Ruiguang Song; Philip Rhodes; Joseph Prejean; Qian An; Lisa M Lee; John Karon; Ron Brookmeyer; Edward H Kaplan; Matthew T McKenna; Robert S Janssen Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-08-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Michael S Lyons; Christopher J Lindsell; Andrew H Ruffner; Alexander T Trott; Carl J Fichtenbaum Journal: Curr HIV Res Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 1.581