. 2018 Dec 6;13(12):e0206074. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206074

Table 12. HIV testing and knowledge of PEP availability.

	Baseline		Follow-up		Odds-ratio of follow-up to baseline prevalence among control clusters (time effect)			Odds-ratio of intervention to control clusters prevalence at follow-up (intervention effect)
	Interv’n	Control	Interv’n	Control	Est. OR	95% CI	p value^a	Est. OR	95% CI	p value^a
	Percent	Percent	Percent	Percent
	Freq/N	Freq/N	Freq/N	Freq/N
Prevalence of reported actions in the past 12 months
Ever tested for HIV	75.2	73.4	85.8	88.9	1.16	1.11–1.21	<0.001	0.96	0.91–1.02	0.177
Ever tested for HIV	493/656	472/642	537/624	555/626	1.16	1.11–1.21	<0.001	0.96	0.91–1.02	0.177
Tested for HIV in the past 12 months	39.9	33.6	47.1	44.7	1.50	1.21–1.87	<0.001	0.94	0.70–1.26	0.700
Tested for HIV in the past 12 months	262/656	216/642	295/626	279/624	1.50	1.21–1.87	<0.001	0.94	0.70–1.26	0.700
Knows that HIV PEP is available in her community	22.3	20.4	45.7	42.2	2.85	2.24–3.63	<0.001	1.09	0.79–1.51	0.592
Knows that HIV PEP is available in her community	146/655	131/643	282/626	263/623	2.85	2.24–3.63	<0.001	1.09	0.79–1.51	0.592

^a p values are based on a GLMM with cluster-specific baseline prevalence equal to the true baseline prevalence plus a random effect for all clusters including those randomized to the intervention.