1520Outcomes after Implementation of a Public Health Program for HIV Partner Notification in Edmonton, Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background. We evaluated the characteristics of newly reported HIV cases and their partners after implementation of HIV Partner Notification guidelines in Edmonton, Canada in April 2010. Methods. All individuals newly diagnosed with HIV in Edmonton, Canada were interviewed by a Partner Notification Nurse (PNN) for sexual, needle sharing and perinatal contacts. Data collected on partners included whether they were located, tested, and test results. A descriptive analysis was performed on data collected from April 2010 to December 2013. Results. There were 346 newly diagnosed HIV cases during this time period: 69.4%(n = 240) were male with a median age of 37 years (IQR 29-46). The majority of male cases were Caucasian (n = 134; 55.8%) with the primary mode of transmission being sex with men (MSM) (n = 142; 59.2%). The majority of female cases were Black (n = 48; 45.3%) and reported heterosexual transmission (n = 80; 75.5%). Seventy per cent (n = 243) of HIV cases provided contact information. Cases reporting contacts were younger (35 years, IQR 28-44 vs 41 years, IQR 33-51, p < 0.001). Those who did not have sexual or IDU as the primary mode of transmission (e.g., vertical transmission) were less likely to report contacts (27.3% vs 71.6%, p = 0.004). Information on 584 contacts was provided; the median number of contacts per case was 1 (IQR 1-3). The majority (92.6%; n = 541) of contacts were exposed through sex, 5.5% (n = 32) through needle sharing and 2.2% (n = 13) perinatally. 15.6% (n = 91) were previously HIV positive. Sixty nine per cent (n = 404) were eligible by place of residence for follow up by local PNNs; 85.7% (n = 347) of these contacts were located and of these, 88.2% (n = 306) were tested resulting in 20 new cases of HIV. All new cases received HIV care; at baseline, 70% (n = 14) had normal CD4 counts (>350 x109/L), 5 cases had CD4 counts 200-350 x109/L and 1 case was below 200 x109/L. Of the previously positive contacts, 81.3% (n = 74) were sero-positive prior to their exposure to the case. 18.7% (n = 17) were sero-positive after their last exposure to the index case. Conclusion. HIV partner notification efforts, conducted by PNNs, resulted in the majority of named contacts being located and tested, including the identification of 20 previously undiagnosed cases of HIV. Disclosures. All authors: No reported disclosures.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».