Skip to main content

Table 5 Association of HIV diagnosis and HIV indicator conditions by gender, age group or urbanisation level

From: The need to scale up HIV indicator condition-guided testing for early case-finding: a case-control study in primary care

 

Cases

Controls

ORd

95% CI

P value

n/N (%)a

n/N (%)

   

for interaction

Total

136/224

60.7

411/2,193

18.7

   

Sex

 Male

122/198

61.6

348/1,933

18.0

8.8

6.3 to 12.3

0.14

 Female

14/26

53.8

63/260

24.2

4.3

1.8 to 10.4

 

Age category (at index date)

 18 to 39 years

49/80

61.3

140/788

17.8

10.8

6.0 to 19.3

 

 40 to 49 years

60/97

61.9

168/946

17.8

8.1

5.1 to 12.9

0.29

  > 50 years

27/47

57.4

103/459

22.4

5.4

2.8 to 10.3

 

Urbanisation levelb

 High urban (>2,500 addresses per km2)

42/76

55.3

117/633

18.5

7.4

4.2 to 13.0

0.49

 Low urban (<2,500 addresses per km2)

58/83

69.9

201/948

21.2

9.7

5.7 to 16.2

 

 Missingc

36/65

55.4

103/612

16.8

   
  1. an = number of cases or controls with HIV indicator conditions, N = total number of cases or controls, % = percentage with HIV indicator condition
  2. bHigh urban: >2,500 addresses per km2; low urban: < 2,500 addresses/km2
  3. cSubjects with missing urbanisation level were not included in the analysis
  4. dadditional effect of gender/age/urbanisation level on the likelihood for an HIV-diagnosis after presence of HIV indicator conditions