IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0095601.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating the Sizes of Populations at High Risk for HIV: A Comparison Study

Author

Listed:
  • Liwei Jing
  • Chengyi Qu
  • Hongmei Yu
  • Tong Wang
  • Yuehua Cui

Abstract

Objectives: Behavioral interventions are effective strategies for HIV/AIDS prevention and control. However, implementation of such strategies relies heavily on the accurate estimation of the high-risk population size. The multiplier method and generalized network scale-up method were recommended to estimate the population size of those at high risk for HIV by UNAIDS/WHO in 2003 and 2010, respectively. This study aims to assess and compare the two methods for estimating the size of populations at high risk for HIV, and to provide practical guidelines and suggestions for implementing the two methods. Methods: Studies of the multiplier method used to estimate the population prevalence of men who have sex with men in China published between July 1, 2003 and July 1, 2013 were reviewed. The generalized network scale-up method was applied to estimate the population prevalence of men who have sex with men in the urban district of Taiyuan, China. Results: The median of studies using the multiplier method to estimate the population prevalence of men who have sex with men in China was 4–8 times lower than the national level estimate. Meanwhile, the estimate of the generalized network scale-up method fell within the range of national level estimate. Conclusions: When high-quality existing data are not readily available, the multiplier method frequently yields underestimated results. We thus suggest that the generalized network scale-up method is preferred when sampling frames for the general population and accurate demographic information are available.

Suggested Citation

  • Liwei Jing & Chengyi Qu & Hongmei Yu & Tong Wang & Yuehua Cui, 2014. "Estimating the Sizes of Populations at High Risk for HIV: A Comparison Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-6, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0095601
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0095601
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0095601
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0095601&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0095601?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0095601. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.