Article Text
PDFClinical ethics
Commentary
The right not to know does not apply to HIV testing
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Linked Articles
- Clinical ethics
- Clinical ethics
- Clinical ethics
- Clinical ethics
- The concise argument
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Adolescents and age of consent to HIV testing: an updated review of national policies in sub-Saharan Africa
- Effect of door-to-door distribution of HIV self-testing kits on HIV testing and antiretroviral therapy initiation: a cluster randomised trial in Malawi
- Personal, interpersonal and structural challenges to accessing HIV testing, treatment and care services among female sex workers, men who have sex with men and transgenders in Karnataka state, South India
- The cost effectiveness and optimal configuration of HIV self-test distribution in South Africa: a model analysis
- HIV testing uptake and determinants among adolescents and young people in Burundi: a cross-sectional analysis of the Demographic and Health Survey 2016–2017
- Peer-led HIV care and the UNAIDS 90-90-90 treatment targets in Tigrai, Ethiopia: a cluster randomised trial and economic evaluation of teach-test-link-trace model (TTLT) trial protocol
- Does community-based distribution of HIV self-tests increase uptake of HIV testing? Results of pair-matched cluster randomised trial in Zambia
- Linkage into care among newly diagnosed HIV-positive individuals tested through outreach and facility-based HIV testing models in Mbeya, Tanzania: a prospective mixed-method cohort study
- HIV testing among men who have sex with men in Tijuana, Mexico: a cross-sectional study
- ‘Bringing testing closer to you’: barriers and facilitators in implementing HIV self-testing among Filipino men-having-sex-with-men and transgender women in National Capital Region (NCR), Philippines – a qualitative study