P5-S5.02 Outcomes following the introduction of HIV partner notification guidelines in Edmonton, Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background In April 2010, the HIV Partner Notification Guidelines were implemented in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Prior to this, partner notification of newly diagnosed HIV cases was conducted inconsistently. Methods All individuals newly diagnosed with HIV in the Alberta Health Services- Edmonton zone were interviewed by a partner notification nurse (PNN) for sexual and needle sharing partners, and perinatal contacts under Alberta's Public Health Act. PNNs attempted to locate named contacts to ensure timely counselling, testing, and follow-up care. The number of contacts in the year preceding the diagnosis and information required to locate each contact was recorded for each case. Additional information included whether they were located, tested, and their test results; all information was entered into a Notifiable Disease Reporting database. A descriptive analysis was performed on the characteristics and outcomes of data collected between 5 April and 31 December 2010. Results There were 50 newly diagnosed HIV cases during this time period. The majority (n=33; 66%) of the cases were male and the overall median age was 39 years (IQR 32–48). Male cases were more likely to be Caucasian (n=21; 63.6%) while female cases were more likely to be Aboriginal (n=8; 47.1%, p=0.001). The primary mode of transmission among male cases was MSM (n=18; 54.5%) and among female cases was heterosexual transmission (n=10; 58.8%). A total of 92 contacts were provided by 36 (72%) of the HIV cases, with an average of 2.6 (range 1–14) contacts per case. The majority (97.8%; n=90) of contacts were exposed through sex with an additional 5 (5.4%) contacts being exposed through needle sharing during drug use. Of the 92 named contacts, 17.4% (n=16) were found to be previously positive for HIV, 16.3% (n=15) resided outside of Edmonton, and the remaining 66.3% (n=61) were followed up by local PNNs. At the time of analysis, 75.4% (n=45) of the contacts were located and of those located, 82.6% (n=38) were tested resulting in four new cases of HIV. Conclusions HIV partner notification efforts resulted in the majority of contacts being located and tested for HIV, with four new cases of HIV identified. Nearly one-quarter (n=20; 21.7%) of the total contacts were HIV positive, suggesting a need for ongoing prevention and risk reduction strategies for individuals living with HIV and their partners.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».