Literature DB >> 24788481

Refusal bias in the estimation of HIV prevalence.

Wendy Janssens1, Jacques van der Gaag, Tobias F Rinke de Wit, Zlata Tanović.   

Abstract

In 2007, UNAIDS corrected estimates of global HIV prevalence downward from 40 million to 33 million based on a methodological shift from sentinel surveillance to population-based surveys. Since then, population-based surveys are considered the gold standard for estimating HIV prevalence. However, prevalence rates based on representative surveys may be biased because of nonresponse. This article investigates one potential source of nonresponse bias: refusal to participate in the HIV test. We use the identity of randomly assigned interviewers to identify the participation effect and estimate HIV prevalence rates corrected for unobservable characteristics with a Heckman selection model. The analysis is based on a survey of 1,992 individuals in urban Namibia, which included an HIV test. We find that the bias resulting from refusal is not significant for the overall sample. However, a detailed analysis using kernel density estimates shows that the bias is substantial for the younger and the poorer population. Nonparticipants in these subsamples are estimated to be three times more likely to be HIV-positive than participants. The difference is particularly pronounced for women. Prevalence rates that ignore this selection effect may be seriously biased for specific target groups, leading to misallocation of resources for prevention and treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24788481     DOI: 10.1007/s13524-014-0290-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Demography        ISSN: 0070-3370


  23 in total

1.  Estimates of HIV-1 prevalence from national population-based surveys as a new gold standard.

Authors:  J Ties Boerma; Peter D Ghys; Neff Walker
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2003-12-06       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Estimating the global burden of HIV/AIDS: what do we really know about the HIV pandemic?

Authors:  Neff Walker; Nicholas C Grassly; Geoff P Garnett; Karen A Stanecki; Peter D Ghys
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2004-06-26       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  HIV testing in national population-based surveys: experience from the Demographic and Health Surveys.

Authors:  Vinod Mishra; Martin Vaessen; J Ties Boerma; Fred Arnold; Ann Way; Bernard Barrere; Anne Cross; Rathavuth Hong; Jasbir Sangha
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 9.408

4.  Refusal bias in HIV prevalence estimates from nationally representative seroprevalence surveys.

Authors:  Georges Reniers; Jeffrey Eaton
Journal:  AIDS       Date:  2009-03-13       Impact factor: 4.177

5.  Mobility, sexual behavior, and HIV infection in an urban population in Cameroon.

Authors:  Nathalie Lydié; Noah J Robinson; Benoît Ferry; Evina Akam; Myriam De Loenzien; Severin Abega
Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr       Date:  2004-01-01       Impact factor: 3.731

6.  HIV infection does not disproportionately affect the poorer in sub-Saharan Africa.

Authors:  Vinod Mishra; Simona Bignami-Van Assche; Robert Greener; Martin Vaessen; Rathavuth Hong; Peter D Ghys; J Ties Boerma; Ari Van Assche; Shane Khan; Shea Rutstein
Journal:  AIDS       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 4.177

7.  Underestimation of HIV prevalence in surveys when some people already know their status, and ways to reduce the bias.

Authors:  Sian Floyd; Anna Molesworth; Albert Dube; Amelia C Crampin; Rein Houben; Menard Chihana; Alison Price; Ndoliwe Kayuni; Jacqueline Saul; Neil French; Judith R Glynn
Journal:  AIDS       Date:  2013-01-14       Impact factor: 4.177

8.  National HIV prevalence estimates for sub-Saharan Africa: controlling selection bias with Heckman-type selection models.

Authors:  Daniel R Hogan; Joshua A Salomon; David Canning; James K Hammitt; Alan M Zaslavsky; Till Bärnighausen
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 3.519

9.  Response rates for providing a blood specimen for HIV testing in a population-based survey of young adults in Zimbabwe.

Authors:  A D McNaghten; Joan M Herold; Hazel M Dube; Michael E St Louis
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2007-07-05       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Comparison of adult HIV prevalence from national population-based surveys and antenatal clinic surveillance in countries with generalised epidemics: implications for calibrating surveillance data.

Authors:  E Gouws; V Mishra; T B Fowler
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 3.519

View more
  5 in total

1.  Using interviewer random effects to remove selection bias from HIV prevalence estimates.

Authors:  Mark E McGovern; Till Bärnighausen; Joshua A Salomon; David Canning
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2015-02-05       Impact factor: 4.615

2.  Adjusting HIV prevalence estimates for non-participation: an application to demographic surveillance.

Authors:  Mark E McGovern; Giampiero Marra; Rosalba Radice; David Canning; Marie-Louise Newell; Till Bärnighausen
Journal:  J Int AIDS Soc       Date:  2015-11-26       Impact factor: 5.396

3.  Do gifts increase consent to home-based HIV testing? A difference-in-differences study in rural KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

Authors:  Mark E McGovern; Kobus Herbst; Frank Tanser; Tinofa Mutevedzi; David Canning; Dickman Gareta; Deenan Pillay; Till Bärnighausen
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 7.196

4.  Accounting for non-response bias using participation incentives and survey design: An application using gift vouchers.

Authors:  Mark E McGovern; David Canning; Till Bärnighausen
Journal:  Econ Lett       Date:  2018-10

5.  Analytical methods used in estimating the prevalence of HIV/AIDS from demographic and cross-sectional surveys with missing data: a systematic review.

Authors:  Neema R Mosha; Omololu S Aluko; Jim Todd; Rhoderick Machekano; Taryn Young
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2020-03-14       Impact factor: 4.615

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.