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