TABLE 3.
Estimation of parameters from the pilot CRT data | ||
| ||
| ||
1 community | 0.67 | |
2 elsewhere | 0.33 | |
| ||
, , | ||
| ||
1 observed, 1 community, 1 direct delivery | 0.61 | |
1 observed, 2 elsewhere, 1 direct delivery | 0.96 | |
1 observed, 1 community, 0 standard testing | 0.57 | |
1 observed, 2 elsewhere, 0 standard testing | 0.97 | |
| ||
, , | ||
| ||
1 HIV test, 1 community, 1 direct delivery | 0.94 | |
1 HIV test, 2 elsewhere, 1 direct delivery | 0.98 | |
1 HIV test, 1 community, 0 standard testing | 0.85 | |
1 HIV test, 2 elsewhere, 0 standard testing | 0.94 | |
| ||
, | ||
| ||
1 HIV test, 1 direct delivery | 0.95 | |
1 HIV test, 0 standard testing | 0.88 | |
| ||
| ||
intercluster correlation | 0.36 | |
| ||
Sample size calculation for a confirmatory CRT | ||
| ||
IPRW design component | 214.6 | |
number of individuals | 2150 | |
number of clusters | 360 | |
| ||
is the indictor function. is the covariate ‘Where do you get your healthcare?’ with answer choices 1 ‘community clinic’ or 2 ‘elsewhere’. is the intervention group: 1 direct delivery of HIV self-tests to sex workers or 0 refer sex workers to standard HIV testing. is the observed indicator: 1 sex worker’s HIV testing status is observed or 0 sex worker’s HIV testing status is missing. is the outcome: 1 sex worker had a HIV test and 0 sex worker did not have a HIV test. |