Estimation of the HIV Basic Reproduction Number in Rural South West Uganda: 1991–2008
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The basic reproduction number, [Formula: see text], is one of the many measures of the epidemic potential of an infection in a population. We estimate HIV [Formula: see text] over 18 years in a rural population in Uganda, examine method-specific differences in estimated [Formula: see text], and estimate behavioural changes that would reduce [Formula: see text] below one. METHODS: Data on HIV natural history and infectiousness were collated from literature. Data on new sexual partner count were available from a rural clinical cohort in Uganda over 1991-2008. [Formula: see text] was estimated using six methods. Behavioural changes required to reduce [Formula: see text] below one were calculated. RESULTS: Reported number of new partners per year was 0 to 16 (women) and 0 to 80 (men). When proportionate sexual mixing was assumed, the different methods yielded comparable [Formula: see text] estimates. Assuming totally assortative mixing led to increased [Formula: see text] estimates in the high sexual activity class while all estimates in the low-activity class were below one. Using the "effective" partner change rate introduced by Anderson and colleagues resulted in [Formula: see text] estimates all above one except in the lowest sexual activity class. [Formula: see text] could be reduced below one if: (a) medium risk individuals reduce their partner acquisition rate by 70% and higher risk individuals reduce their partner acquisition rate by 93%, or (b) higher risk individuals reduce the partner acquisition rate by 95%. CONCLUSIONS: The estimated [Formula: see text] depended strongly on the method used. Ignoring variation in sexual activity leads to an underestimation of [Formula: see text]. Relying on behaviour change alone to eradicate HIV may require unrealistically large reductions in risk behaviour, even though for a small proportion of the population. To control HIV, complementary prevention strategies such as male circumcision and HIV treatment services need rapid scale up.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".