HIV incidence among post-partum women in Zimbabwe: risk factors and the effect of vitamin A supplementation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To test whether post-partum vitamin A supplementation can reduce incident HIV among post-partum women and identify risk factors for HIV incidence. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled trial METHODS: Between November 1997 and January 2001, 14,110 women were randomly administered 400,000 IU vitamin A or placebo within 96 h post-partum. HIV incidence was monitored among 9562 HIV-negative women. RESULTS: Cumulative incidence was 3.4% [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.0-3.8] and 6.5% (95% CI, 5.7-7.4) over 12 and 24 months post-partum, respectively. Vitamin A supplementation had no impact on incidence [hazard ratio (HR), 1.08; 95% CI, 0.85-1.38]. However, among 398 women for whom baseline serum retinol was measured, those with levels indicative of deficiency (< 0.7 micromol/l, 9.2% of those measured) were 10.4 (95% CI, 3.0-36.3) times more likely to seroconvert than women with higher concentrations. Furthermore, among women with low serum retinol, vitamin A supplementation tended to be protective against incidence (HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.03-2.60; P = 0.26), although not significantly so, perhaps due to limited statistical power. Severe anaemia (haemoglobin < 70 g/l) was associated with a 2.7-fold (95%CI, 1.2-6.1) greater incidence. Younger women were at higher risk of HIV infection: incidence declined by 5.7% (2.8-8.6) with each additional year of age. CONCLUSION: Among post-partum women, a single large-dose vitamin A supplementation had no effect on incidence, although low serum retinol was a risk factor for seroconversion. Further investigation is required to determine whether vitamin A supplementation of vitamin-A-deficient women or treatment of anaemic women can reduce HIV incidence.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".