2020
DOI: 10.21203/rs.2.20578/v3
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Efficacy of HIV interventions among factory workers in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Abstract: Background: Factory workers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are vulnerable to HIV transmission. Interventions are needed to prevent HIV in this population. We systematically reviewed published literature on the efficacy of various HIV interventions in reducing stigma, risk behaviors and HIV transmission among factory workers.Methods: A systematic review was performed using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Four databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus and EMBASE) were searched for relevant pu… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 24 publications
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Consistent with previous studies among migrants in Thailand [43] and other countries [44], our ndings showed that women migrant workers who possessed higher HIV knowledge were more likely to report having ever tested for HIV. Alongside similar ndings from scholars in other countries, our ndings suggest that improving HIV knowledge among migrant workers in Vietnamese IZ settings may help improve HIV testing behaviors among this population.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Consistent with previous studies among migrants in Thailand [43] and other countries [44], our ndings showed that women migrant workers who possessed higher HIV knowledge were more likely to report having ever tested for HIV. Alongside similar ndings from scholars in other countries, our ndings suggest that improving HIV knowledge among migrant workers in Vietnamese IZ settings may help improve HIV testing behaviors among this population.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%