Open AccessAvailability and Quality of Size Estimations of Female Sex Workers, Men Who Have Sex with Men, People Who Inject Drugs and Transgender Women in Low- and Middle-Income Countries
Author(s) -
Keith Sabin,
Jinkou Zhao,
Jesus Maria Garcia Calleja,
Yaou Sheng,
Sonia Arias Garcia,
Annette Reinisch,
Ryuichi Komatsu
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0155150
Subject(s) - estimation , men who have sex with men , transgender , small area estimation , medicine , demography , population , data quality , census , mark and recapture , developing country , environmental health , geography , human immunodeficiency virus (hiv) , psychology , economic growth , family medicine , economics , operations management , metric (unit) , management , syphilis , sociology , psychoanalysis
Objective To assess the availability and quality of population size estimations of female sex workers (FSW), men who have sex with men (MSM), people who inject drug (PWID) and transgender women. Methods Size estimation data since 2010 were retrieved from global reporting databases, Global Fund grant application documents, and the peer-reviewed and grey literature. Overall quality and availability were assessed against a defined set of criteria, including estimation methods, geographic coverage, and extrapolation approaches. Estimates were compositely categorized into ‘nationally adequate’, ‘nationally inadequate but locally adequate’, ‘documented but inadequate methods’, ‘undocumented or untimely’ and ‘no data.’ Findings Of 140 countries assessed, 41 did not report any estimates since 2010. Among 99 countries with at least one estimate, 38 were categorized as having nationally adequate estimates and 30 as having nationally inadequate but locally adequate estimates. Multiplier, capture-recapture, census and enumeration, and programmatic mapping were the most commonly used methods. Most countries relied on only one estimate for a given population while about half of all reports included national estimates. A variety of approaches were applied to extrapolate from sites-level numbers to national estimates in two-thirds of countries. Conclusions Size estimates for FSW, MSM, PWID and transgender women are increasingly available but quality varies widely. The different approaches present challenges for data use in design, implementation and evaluation of programs for these populations in half of the countries assessed. Guidance should be further developed to recommend: a) applying multiple estimation methods; b) estimating size for a minimum number of sites; and, c) documenting extrapolation approaches.