Login
Login
MEDAT Data Repository - SAMRC
An Online Microdata Catalog
  • Home
  • Microdata Catalog
  • Citations
    Home / Central Data Catalog / INVESTIGATINGTHEQUALITYOFHIVRAPIDTESTINGPRACTICESINPUBLICANTENATALHEALTHCAREFACILITIES / variable [F1]
central

Investigating the quality of HIV rapid testing practices in public antenatal health care facilities

South Africa
Health Systems Research Unit
Duduzile F. Nsiband, Selamawit A. Woldesenbet, Adrian Puren, Peter Barron, Vincent I. Maduna, Carl Lombard, Mireille Cheyip, Mary Mogashoa, Yogan Pillay, Vuyolwethu Magasana, Trisha Ramraj, Tendesayi Kufa, Gurpreet Kindra, Ameena Goga, Witness Chirinda
Created on April 29, 2022 Last modified April 29, 2022 Page views 29125 Download 4 Documentation in PDF Metadata DDI/XML JSON
  • Study description
  • Documentation
  • Data Description
  • Get Microdata
  • Data files
  • data
CSV JSON

test_c_5_7 (test_c_5_7)

Data file: data

Overview

Valid: 200
Invalid: 0
Type: Discrete
Width: 79
Range: -
Format: character

Questions and instructions

Categories
Value Category Cases
46 1
0.5%
Does not record anywhere 1
0.5%
Invalid QC results not recorded properly 1
0.5%
NO QC 2
1%
Neve had invalid results and do not know where to record it 1
0.5%
Never ha incorrect 1
0.5%
Never had incorrect results 1
0.5%
Never had inval7d results 2
1%
Never had invalid 1
0.5%
Never had invalid but they will record 1
0.5%
Never had invalid or incorrect results but they know how and where to record it 1
0.5%
Never had invalid results 42
21%
Never had invalid results but know where to record it 1
0.5%
Never had invalid results but knows where to record it 1
0.5%
Never had invalid results but they know where to record it 1
0.5%
Never have invalid results 1
0.5%
Nevet had invalid results 2
1%
Nevet had invalid results but know where to record it 1
0.5%
No QC 1
0.5%
No documents 1
0.5%
No evidence 1
0.5%
No evidence of incorrect invalid results recorded 1
0.5%
No evidence of invalid QC results recorded 1
0.5%
No implementation 1
0.5%
No invalid 3
1.5%
No invalid / incorrect invalid QC results properly recorded 1
0.5%
No invalid QC results properly recorded 3
1.5%
No invalid QC results recorded 12
6%
No invalid QC results recorded and they do not know how to record them 1
0.5%
No invalid results 5
2.5%
No record 2
1%
No records 8
4%
No they don't notice they retest 1
0.5%
No training 2
1%
Not enrolled 1
0.5%
Not doing QC 18
9%
Not doing QC samples 1
0.5%
Not doing QC specimens 4
2%
Not doing the QC 1
0.5%
Not done 21
10.5%
Not done recently, but said they will if they get them 1
0.5%
Not done yet 2
1%
Not enrolled 3
1.5%
Not recorded 1
0.5%
Not recorded and never had invalid results 1
0.5%
Not seen 1
0.5%
Not sure what to did with invalid in QA 1
0.5%
Not trained 6
3%
Not trained on QC 3
1.5%
Not used 2
1%
Not yet started 1
0.5%
Not yet trained 1
0.5%
Notdoing QC 1
0.5%
QC not done 5
2.5%
Repeat test, but not record 1
0.5%
Said will record in spaces provided 1
0.5%
The records I viewed were until 2015. Did not have invalid. 1
0.5%
The tester did not know what to do with an invalid results, 1
0.5%
There are no records 1
0.5%
There are no records on the files 1
0.5%
They are trained awaiting, serum sample 1
0.5%
They do not have invalid QC results recorded 1
0.5%
They dont have invalid or incorrect results but they will record 1
0.5%
They dont have invalid results so far but they said they will record 1
0.5%
They said they never had invalid results 1
0.5%
They will record 1
0.5%
no invalid results 1
0.5%
no records 5
2.5%
not recorded 1
0.5%
Warning: these figures indicate the number of cases found in the data file. They cannot be interpreted as summary statistics of the population of interest.
MEDAT Data Repository - SAMRC

© MEDAT Data Repository - SAMRC, All Rights Reserved.