MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Increases in HIV incidence among men who have sex with men undergoing repeat diagnostic HIV testing in Ontario, Canada

2002· article· en· W2012027960 on OpenAlexaffabout
Liviana Calzavara, Ann N. Burchell, Carol Major, Robert S. Remis, Paul Corey, Ted Myers, Peggy Millson, Evelyn Wallace

Bibliographic record

VenueAIDS · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Health and Long Term CareUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Men who have sex with menMedicineIncidence (geometry)SidaMale HomosexualityDemographyViral diseaseFamily medicineSyphilis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To estimate HIV incidence density for different exposure categories among people undergoing repeat testing in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: Persons using voluntary, diagnostic HIV testing at least twice were identified by computerized and manual record linkage. In the 1992-2000 period, 980 seroconverters and 340 994 repeat negative testers contributed 936 145 person years (PY) of observation. Incidence density (ID) was calculated according to Kitayaporn et al. Poisson regression was used to evaluate differences in incidence. RESULTS: Among men who have sex with men (MSM), ID declined between 1992-1996, from 1.23 per 100 PY in 1992 to 0.79 per 100 PY in 1996 [relative risk (RR), 0.86 per year; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.77-0.96]. Subsequently, ID increased to 1.39 per 100 PY in 1999 (RR, 1.18 per year; 95% CI, 1.05-1.34). In 2000, ID was 1.16 per 100 PY but this decrease was not statistically significantly different from 1999. MSM in their twenties had the highest ID in 1992-1996, but in 1996-2000 MSM in their thirties had the highest risk of infection. Among injecting drug users (IDU), ID decreased from 0.64 per 100 PY in 1992 to 0.14 per 100 PY in 2000 (RR, 0.87 per year; 95% CI, 0.80-0.94). Among heterosexuals, annual incidence remained constant at about 0.03 per 100 PY in 1992-2000. CONCLUSIONS: Increases in ID were identified among MSM from 1996 to 1999. These findings are consistent with other research. Continued vigilance and improved surveillance are needed to better understand and control the epidemic.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations95
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIDSSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207