This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

We applaud Freedberg and Samet¹ for their recent contribution and suggestion that physicians lower the clinical threshold for use of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing. They argue that HIV testing should be used for screening purposes rather than solely for diagnosis because testing has 2 advantages: it can help to route infected persons into effective care, and it can help people to reduce their sexual risk behavior. While we agree that these outcomes are desirable and that HIV testing is decidedly beneficial for those who learn that they are infected, we are concerned that the authors are too optimistic regarding the impact of HIV testing on sexual risk behavior.

We recently published a meta-analysis of 27 controlled studies that assessed sexual behavior before and after HIV counseling and testing.² The findings indicated that HIV counseling and testing led to risk behavior reduction (eg, decreased frequency of unprotected intercourse) only among . . . [Full Text of this Article]

RELATED ARTICLE

Think HIV: Why Physicians Should Lower Their Threshold for HIV Testing
Kenneth A. Freedberg and Jeffrey H. Samet
Arch Intern Med. 1999;159(17):1994-2000.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Conducting Meta-Analyses of HIV Prevention Literatures from a Theory-Testing Perspective
Marsh et al.
Eval Health Prof 2001;24:255-276.
ABSTRACT