P3.217 International Comparison of Recent Trends in the Rates of HIV Diagnoses Among Men Who Have Sex with Men (MSM)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<h3>Background</h3> After a rise in the early 2000s in the number of new HIV diagnoses among MSM in New Zealand, also witnessed in many developed countries, in 2011 the number dropped by 34% compared to 2010. To assess relative progress on control we compare trends in HIV diagnosis rates among MSM in developed countries with similarly mature epidemics. <h3>Methods</h3> We obtained data on annual HIV diagnoses among MSM between 2003–2011 from 17 developed countries (Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Ireland, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Germany, UK, US). We reallocated those with unknown means of infection according to the countries’ pattern of known causes, and used countries’ adjustment for delayed reporting where available. The diagnosis rate was derived using the population of men aged 15–64. <h3>Results</h3> New Zealand has low rates compared to most countries of Western Europe, North America and Australia, and are comparable with those of Scandinavia All counties except New Zealand, Iceland and Canada, experienced a slight overall rise in diagnosis rates in the period 2003–2011 Over the past four years there has been a: Slight trend upwards in UK, Belgium, France, Australia, Ireland No clear trend in Spain, Canada, Germany, Denmark, Norway Slight trend downwards in New Zealand, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, and possibly Iceland Clear trend downwards in Switzerland. <h3>Conclusions</h3> New Zealand has a low rate of HIV diagnoses, relative to many other developed countries. Our drop in 2011 HIV is encouraging but not unique. Limitations of this study are that the data are of diagnosis not infection rates, are influenced by patterns of testing, immigration and emigration, and dual modes of transmission, and the proportion who are MSM may vary between countries. Factors relating to recent trends should be explored.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".