Undiagnosed HIV among people who inject drugs in Manipur, India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Manipur is a geographically isolated state of India characterised by a high HIV prevalence among people who inject drugs (PWID). A low-to-moderate lifetime rate of HIV testing has been documented amongst PWID in Manipur. Little is known about the extent of undiagnosed HIV in this setting and whether uptake of HIV testing (and knowledge of a positive diagnosis) leads HIV-positive PWID to change their risk behaviours. The cross-sectional data (n = 821) analysed for this paper were collected in 2009 for the Integrated Behavioural and Biological Assessment (IBBA) using interviewer-administered questionnaires and the collection of de-linked blood and urine samples. Almost one-third (30.7%) of the participants tested HIV positive. The majority knew where to obtain a confidential HIV test (80.7%), however, half of the HIV-positive participants had either never had an HIV test (37.7%), or had undertaken a test without collecting the result (12.7%). Almost one-quarter (23.4%) of the HIV-positive participants and 17.4% of the HIV-negative participants had shared a needle/syringe with at least one other injector during the preceding month. Encouragingly, HIV-positive participants were significantly more likely than HIV-negative participants to use condoms with their regular sexual partners, however, there was still a high proportion of HIV-positive participants who did not use a condom at last sex with their regular (47.2%) or casual (48.0%) partners. Having taken an HIV test and collected the result was associated with a reduction in HIV-risk behaviours among HIV-positive participants, but not among HIV-negative participants. In conclusion, we found that a substantial proportion of the HIV-positive PWID in Manipur were not aware of their positive status, and risky injecting and sexual practices were commonplace. However, HIV-positive PWID appear to reduce their high-risk behaviours when they become aware of their HIV status highlighting the importance of taking HIV testing coverage to scale.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".