Skip to main content

Volume 22 Supplement 1

Innovating with HIV self-testing for impact in southern Africa: Lessons learned from the STAR (Self-Testing AfRica) Initiative


Edited by Vincent Wong, Muhammad Jamil and Thato Chidakire.

  1. Several trials of community-based HIV self-testing (HIVST) provide evidence on the acceptability and feasibility of campaign-style distribution to reach first-time testers, men and adolescents. However, we do not...

    Authors: Anke Rotsaert, Euphemia Sibanda, Karin Hatzold, Cheryl Johnson, Elizabeth Corbett, Melissa Neuman and Frances Cowan
    Citation: BMC Infectious Diseases 2022 22(Suppl 1):51
  2. Young people, aged 16–24, in southern Malawi have high uptake of HIV self-testing (HIVST) but low rates of linking to services following HIVST, especially in comparison, to older generations. The study aim is ...

    Authors: Lisa Harrison, Moses Kumwenda, Lot Nyirenda, Richard Chilongosi, Elizabeth Corbett, Karin Hatzold, Cheryl Johnson, Musonda Simwinga, Nicola Desmond and Miriam Taegtmeyer
    Citation: BMC Infectious Diseases 2022 22(Suppl 1):395
  3. HIV self-testing (HIVST) has the potential to increase coverage of HIV testing, but concerns exist about intended users’ ability to correctly perform and interpret tests, especially in poor communities with lo...

    Authors: Melissa Neuman, Alwyn Mwinga, Kezia Kapaku, Lucheka Sigande, Caroline Gotsche, Miriam Taegtmeyer, Russell Dacombe, Kwitaka Maluzi, Barry Kosloff, Cheryl Johnson, Karin Hatzold, Elizabeth L. Corbett and Helen Ayles
    Citation: BMC Infectious Diseases 2022 22(Suppl 1):494

Annual Journal Metrics

  • Citation Impact
    3.670 - 2-year Impact Factor (2021)
    3.714 - 5-year Impact Factor (2021)
    1.448 - SNIP (Source Normalized Impact per Paper)
    1.042 - SJR (SCImago Journal Rank)

    24 days to first decision for all manuscripts (Median)
    68 days to first decision for reviewed manuscripts only (Median)

    14,215,125 Downloads (2021)
    28,243 Altmetric mentions (2021)

Peer-review Terminology

  • The following summary describes the peer review process for this journal:

    Identity transparency: Single anonymized

    Reviewer interacts with: Editor

    Review information published: Review reports. Reviewer Identities reviewer opt in. Author/reviewer communication

    More information is available here

Sign up for article alerts and news from this journal