2008
DOI: 10.1097/01.aids.0000343770.92949.0b
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prevalence and determinants of HIV and sexually transmitted infections in a general population-based sample in Mysore district, Karnataka state, southern India

Abstract: HIV prevalence in the general population of Mysore was found to be comparable to recent prevalence estimates for Karnataka state, and also similar to recent prevalence estimates from antenatal clinic attenders for the district. Few modifiable risk factors for HIV infection were identified. There is evidence from this study that high-risk behaviour may have been underreported, but the prevalence of STI was generally low.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
20
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
3
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These Additionally, there was a highly significant relationship (p<0.01) between the HIV status of female participants and their area of residence, with higher rates of HIV prevalence among women in urban areas (0.29%) than rural areas (0.18%). These findings concur with that of other studies, which indicate that HIV prevalence was higher in urban areas than rural areas (Munro et al 2008;Perkins et al 2009). It has been argued that the reason for these findings is that certain types of risk-taking behavior, e.g., drug injecting use and sexual contact with CSWs, are more common in urban than rural places of residence (Mahanta et al 2008;Saidel et al 2008;Kumar et al 2008;Gajendra et al 2011;Gupta et al 2010;Saggurti et al 2008).…”
Section: Sociodemographic Characteristicssupporting
confidence: 93%
“…These Additionally, there was a highly significant relationship (p<0.01) between the HIV status of female participants and their area of residence, with higher rates of HIV prevalence among women in urban areas (0.29%) than rural areas (0.18%). These findings concur with that of other studies, which indicate that HIV prevalence was higher in urban areas than rural areas (Munro et al 2008;Perkins et al 2009). It has been argued that the reason for these findings is that certain types of risk-taking behavior, e.g., drug injecting use and sexual contact with CSWs, are more common in urban than rural places of residence (Mahanta et al 2008;Saidel et al 2008;Kumar et al 2008;Gajendra et al 2011;Gupta et al 2010;Saggurti et al 2008).…”
Section: Sociodemographic Characteristicssupporting
confidence: 93%
“…This is comparable to previously obtained measures of HSV-2 prevalence among other pregnant women in India [16,17]. The 6.7% prevalence is lower than the three previously obtained estimates of HSV-2 prevalence in the state of Karnataka, which ranged from 10.9 to 18.9% [20][21][22] although these studies focused on nonpregnant populations. Almost all the women in this study reported having a single sex partner in their lifetime and one woman reported being unmarried.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 83%
“…The methods used for sampling and data collection were the same in both districts and have been described in detail elsewhere [8]; (http://www.khpt.org/Work%20paper%201. pdf).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Questions were administered by trained interviewers in a face-to-face interview (FTFI) format, and included socio-demographic information, data on types of partnerships, sexual behaviour, STI history, and knowledge and attitudes with respect to HIV/AIDS. Urine and blood specimens were collected from all consenting participants, and subsequently tested anonymously for antibodies to HIV, HSV-2 and syphilis; and for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae using nucleic acid amplification tests [8].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%