Relative time to pregnancy among HIV-infected and uninfected women in the Women's Interagency HIV Study, 2002–2009
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence rate of, and the relative time to pregnancy by HIV status in US women between 2002 and 2009. DESIGN: The Women's Interagency HIV Study (WIHS) is an ongoing, multicenter prospective cohort study of the natural and treated history of HIV infection and related outcomes among women with and without HIV. METHODS: Eligible participants were 45 years of age or less; sexually active with male partner(s) or reported a pregnancy outcome within the past year; and never reported hysterectomy, tubal ligation, or oopherectomy. Poisson regression was conducted to compare pregnancy incidence rates over time by HIV status. Relative time to pregnancy was ascertained via Kaplan-Meier plots and generalized gamma survival analysis. RESULTS: Adjusting for age, number of male sex partners, contraception, parity, exchanging sex, and alcohol use, HIV infection was associated with a 40% reduction in the incidence rate of pregnancy [incidence rate ratio = 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46-0.78]. The time for HIV-infected women to become pregnant was 73% longer relative to HIV-uninfected women (relative time = 1.73, 95% CI 1.35-2.36). In addition to HIV infection, decreased parity and older age were independent predictors of lower pregnancy incidence. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the beneficial effects of modern antiretroviral therapy on survival and prevention of maternal-to-child transmission, our findings suggest that pregnancy incidence remains lower among HIV-infected women. Whether this lower incidence is due to behavioral differences or reduced biologic fertility remains an area worthy of further study.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".