Svenstrupalexandersen9830

001). The proportion of MSM who had HIV self-testing among prior HIV testers significantly increased from 32.2% (259/805) to 75.2% (406/540) during the study period (trend Z =14.3, P less then 0.001). Conclusions The HIV testing rate, HIV self-testing rate and proportion of men who had HIV self-testing among former HIV testers among web-based Chinese MSM showed substantial increases from 2013 to 2016,and 2018. This suggests that HIV self-testing may have a significant effect on the expansion of HIV testing coverage in MSM, and has important public health implications for HIV/AIDS prevention in China.Objective To evaluate the roles between two different HIV self-testing models in promoting HIV-testing among men who have sex with men (MSM). Methods This paper focuses on two HIV self-testing service models. BAY-985 IKK inhibitor The first; is the online self-testing model (HIV self-testing conventional model) with the sexual health promotion network platform. The other one is an innovative HIV self-testing model (secondary distribution model), based on the previous program. The two different self-testing models, including the number of indexes and alters, the positive rate, and the demographics of indexes and alters, are compared. The influence of volunteers with or without leadership on the number of HIV self-test kits distributed or self-use is analyzed through the leadership survey scale. Results The return rates of HIV self-testing results in the two models are 94.7%(323/341) and 99.2%(1 141/1 150), respectively, within 30 days. The proportion of alters in the secondary distribution is significantly higher (45.9%,281/612) than the conventional HIV self-testing (6.3%,20/318). In the secondary distribution model, the difference between the number of indexes and alters indicators including age, marital status, residence, sex orientation, anal sex with men in the past six months, and HIV test are statistically significant (χ2 test, all P less then 0.05). The opinion leader of MSM has significantly impacted the promotion of HIV self-testing (P less then 0.05). Conclusions Both models can promote HIV self-testing, result return, and HIV positive detection among MSM. In terms of expanding the testing and detection of HIV positive, the secondary distribution mode shows more obvious advantages, which significantly promotes a large number of MSM who have never been tested for HIV to undergo HIV testing. Influential indexes have a significant effect on increasing the HIV testing rate and promoting HIV testing among MSM.HIV self-testing is a key measure and strategy to expand the coverage of HIV testing in key populations, which has great value in application and high acceptance in key populations. The World Health Organization (WHO) issued the Guidelines on HIV self-testing and partner notification in 2016 to support the application of HIV self-testing and provide specific guidance for countries and organizations to develop corresponding public health policies for the purpose of improving the accessibility and utilization of HIV diagnostics. HIV self-testing has been promoted in many countries and has achieved great results. This article provides an overview of the current domestic and international HIV self-testing policies, intervention models, the use of self-testing kits, the accuracy of self-testing kits, and the application of pre- and post-testing counseling services to provide reference for the further improvement of HIV self-testing in China.Objective To systematically evaluate the methodology and reporting quality of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines/consensus and provide lights for drafting CRC screening guidelines in China. Methods The literature retrieval for all the Chinese and English guidelines published before September 1st, 2020 was conducted by using Chinese/English databases, such as China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, VIP, SinoMed, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Guideline International Network, and supplement with the official website of multiple regions, such as the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and American Cancer Society. We utilized The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation Ⅱ (AGREE Ⅱ) and Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) approaches to assess the quality of CRC screening guidelines/consensus comprehensively. Results After quality control, a total of 19 guidelines/consensus released by the United States, China, Australia, Canada, Britainweak evidence. Furthermore, subgroup analysis indicates that the quality of guidelines in developed countries is superior to that of China. Conclusion The number of CRC screening guidelines/consensus is increasing gradually, and the overall quality of those is high, but the normative nature is warranted to be strengthened.Objective To understand the research progress and quality of lung cancer screening guidelines and consensus in China and abroad, and to provide reference for the formulation of high-quality lung cancer screening guidelines in China. Methods Databases including PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, SinoMed, VIP and Wanfang Data were searched, websites and important references were also searched by hand retrieval. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation Ⅱ(AGREE Ⅱ) and Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) were used to assess the quality of newly published or updated guidelines and consensus. Results A total of 9 guidelines and consensus published between 2015 and 2020 were included in this study, with countries including the United States, China, Canada, Saudi Arabia and South Africa. The field of scope and purpose and clarity of presentation scored relatively high but the rigor of development and applicability scored low. Five guidelines were judged to be A-level, all of which were published abroad, and the remaining four were B-level, including three guidelines and consensus issued by China and 1 guideline issued by South Africa. The report rate of RIGHT were higher in basic information and background, lower in review and quality assurance, funding and declaration and management of interests. There were 5 guidelines with a good level and 4 guidelines and consensus with a moderate level. The best overall quality guidelines were those published by the American College of Chest Physicians in 2018 and by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care in 2016. Conclusions The number of countries and institutions that issue lung cancer screening guidelines and consensus had been increasing gradually, but the quality in China remained low. It is necessary to develop high-quality lung cancer screening guidelines suitable for China's national conditions in combination with evidence-based methods to guide practice.