Psychosocial predictors of HIV testing behaviors among high risk heterosexuals

Though a lot of progress has been made in the treatment, prevention, and in increasing the knowledge and awareness of HIV/AIDS, the CDC reports that over 21% of the people infected with HIV are unaware of their HIV serostatus. Thirty-one percent of people infected with HIV are diagnosed late in the disease progression, often too late to prevent the transmission or the progression of HIV to AIDS. CDC has set a goal to increase by the year 2010, the number of people aware of the HIV serostatus by 5%. ^ This study examined the association between decision-making and risk-taking (assessed using the decision-making confidence and risk-taking scales of the Texas Christian University Self Rating Form) and HIV testing behaviors within a population of heterosexuals at risk for HIV infections living in Harris County, Texas (N=923). Data used in the study was obtained during the first cycle of the National HIV Behavioral Surveillance among heterosexuals at risk for HIV infection (NHBS-HET1), conducted from October, 2006 to June, 2007. Eighty percent of the study population reported testing for HIV at some point in their lives. The results showed that individuals who scored high (>3.3) on the decision-making confidence scale of the TCU/SRF were more likely to be tested for HIV when compared to those who scored low on the scale (OR= 2.02, 95% CI= 1.44–2.84), and that individuals who score low on the risk-taking scale of the TCU/SRF were more likely to have been tested for HIV when compared to those who scored high on the scale (OR= 1.65, 95% CI= 1.2–2.31). Several demographic factors were also assessed for their association with HIV testing behaviors. Only sex was found to be associated with HIV testing. ^ The findings suggest that risk-taking and decision-making are predictors of HIV testing behaviors such as prior HIV testing within heterosexuals living in high-risk areas of Houston, Texas, and that intervention designed to improve the risk-taking and decision-making attributes of this population might improve HIV testing within this population.^

Body image rating scales to assess obesity

Obesity prevalence in the U.S. has increased during the last three decades with major impact on public health. Screening for obesity in a population with unknown weight status can be time- and resource-consuming, but the information is valuable for prioritizing and allocating scarce resources. The challenge remains to properly assess obesity with the available methods. Body Image Rating Scales (BIRS) have initially been developed to assess body image disturbances, but also seem useful as an alternative method in assessing obesity prevalence. Several different BIRS exists. In this project I reviewed the literature that exists regarding the use of BIRS, and its advantages and limitations for the assessment of obesity status with regards to BMI. The result yielded nine publications that examined eight different scales and their correlation with BMI, ranging from r=.59 for self-reported BMI to r=.94 for measured BMI. One concern is the lack of standardization of this method to assess obesity, given the range of different scales. While many methods for obesity assessment are available, the simplicity, ease of use and cost-effectiveness of BIRS make it very appealing. BIRS remain a potentially attractive option to assess the weight status of a large population with minimal requirements in assets and time, especially in situations where measuring instruments are not available, or when height or weight could not be recalled.^