Table 3. Participant interpretation of sample test results, by site.a .
| CDC (n = 200),n (column %) | DSC (n = 598),n (column %) | Private clinics (n = 196),n (column %) | Total (n = 994),n (column %) | |
| Positive sample resultb | ||||
| Read correctly | 182 (91.0) | 579 (96.8) | 188 (98.4) | 949 (96.0) |
| Read as negative | 4 (2.0) | 1 (0.2) | 0 (0) | 5 (0.5) |
| Read as invalid | 14 (7.0) | 18 (3.0) | 3 (1.6) | 35 (3.5) |
| Negative sample resultb | ||||
| Read correctly | 171 (85.5) | 568 (95.0) | 186 (94.9) | 925 (93.1) |
| Read as positive | 1 (0.5) | 5 (0.8) | 2 (1.0) | 8 (0.8) |
| Read as invalid | 28 (14.0) | 25 (4.2) | 8 (4.1) | 61 (6.1) |
| Invalid resultc | ||||
| Read correctly | 182 (91.9) | 585 (97.8) | 172 (90.5) | 939 (95.2) |
| Read as negative | 10 (5.1) | 5 (0.8) | 14 (7.4) | 29 (2.9) |
| Read as positive | 6 (3.0) | 8 (1.3) | 4 (2.1) | 18 (1.8) |
| Analyses excluding invalids | ||||
| Positive sample result | CDC (n = 186),n (column %) | DSC (n = 580),n (column %) | Private clinics (n = 188),n (column %) | Total (n = 954),n (column %) |
| Read correctly | 182 (97.8) | 579 (99.8%) | 188 (100%) | 949 (99.5%) |
| Read as negative | 4 (2.2) | 1 (0.2%) | 0 (0%) | 5 (0.5%) |
| Negative sample result | CDC (n = 172),n (column %) | DSC (n = 573),n (column %) | Private clinics (n = 188),n (column %) | Total (n = 933),n (column %) |
| Read correctly | 171 (99.4) | 568 (99.1) | 186 (98.9) | 925 (99.1) |
| Read as positive | 1 (0.6) | 5 (0.9) | 2 (1.1) | 8 (0.9) |
a
Five positive samples and 6 invalid were missing interpretation results and excluded from analysis.
b
P-value comparing incorrect interpretation between known HIV-positive participants and others was <0.001.
c
P-value comparing incorrect interpretation between known HIV-positive participants and others was 0.023.