MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979743121 · doi:10.2202/1948-4690.1011

Using HIV Diagnostic Data to Estimate HIV Incidence: Method and Simulation

2011· article· en· W1979743121 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Communications in Infectious Diseases · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Incidence (geometry)Distribution (mathematics)VirologyMedicineImmunologyBiologyStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a new approach to estimate the number of new infections with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), by integrating the back-calculation method based on HIV diagnostic data with proportions of recent infections among newly diagnosed individuals. This is done by establishing an explicit link between the distribution of time-since-infection given being tested and the distribution of time-to-testing given being infected. The trend in the proportions of recent infections identifies the time-to-testing distribution, which would have not been identifiable based on HIV surveillance data alone, and makes back-calculation possible. The integration of the proportions of recent infections among newly diagnosed HIV into the model allows a probabilistic interpretation of the estimated proportions of recent infections based on the results of laboratory tests, in terms of the estimated distribution of the time-since-infection given being tested.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.724
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.152
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it