In February 2011, the PubMed database was searched for studies of HIV testing in community settings conducted in resource-rich countries, after the introduction of highly active antiretroviral therapy (post-1996). Broad search terms were used to maximize the number of results: HIV; testing; screening; community; outreach; voluntary counselling; venues; nonclinical; nonhealthcare; mobile health clinics; community health centres; and needle-exchange

Staurosporine mw programmes were used in various combinations. Where possible, medical sub-heading (MESH) terms were included in the search. Reference lists of those papers retrieved from the electronic search were reviewed for additional pertinent references. Community HIV testing facilities were defined as those that are

based outside pre-existing traditional healthcare settings. These include both stand-alone HIV testing services, provided separately from other clinical services, and venues primarily used for other purposes (such as social venues or community centres) where HIV testing is available as an additional service. For the purposes of this review, established HIV testing provision within hospitals, primary care facilities, antenatal clinics and sexually transmitted infection (STI) clinics was excluded. Studies were included in the final analysis if they were conducted in a community setting, as defined above, and reported at least one of the following outcome measures: uptake of HIV testing in community settings; HIV seropositivity of populations tested in community settings; client attitudes MK 2206 towards HIV testing in community settings;

or provider attitudes towards HIV testing in community settings. We included studies conducted in resource-rich settings in Western Europe, North America and the Antipodes which were published from 1996 onwards. A total of 3107 papers were identified using the search strategy. Titles, abstracts and full papers were screened independently by two researchers and results from screening by each researcher were compared. After this process, 48 papers were found to contain at least one of the outcome measures of interest and were therefore considered appropriate for data extraction (Fig. 1). These 48 papers Carbachol were examined for evidence of duplication of data and four papers were excluded on this basis, giving a final total of 44 papers being included in the review (Table 1). Where papers reported on different outcome measures from the same location, both papers were included in the final analysis. Studies were stratified by the target population and the setting where HIV testing took place. Acceptability of the HIV testing strategy was examined using uptake of testing and client and staff attitudes to testing. Effectiveness of HIV testing was examined with regard to new diagnoses made and transfer of those individuals to appropriate HIV-related care and support services.