Prenatal Screening and Perinatal HIV Transmission in Northern Alberta, 1999–2006
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the effectiveness of a program that includes routine opt-out prenatal HIV screening, combination antiretroviral therapy (ART), and a multidisciplinary team in preventing perinatal HIV transmission. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on HIV-infected pregnant women in northern Alberta, Canada, who delivered between January 1, 1999, and February 28, 2006. RESULTS: Ninety-eight women had 113 deliveries. Forty-three percent were diagnosed with HIV infection through prenatal screening. Approximately 60% of HIV-infected pregnant women were Aboriginal, with 45% reporting alcohol use and 42% illicit drug use during pregnancy. The use of combination ART during pregnancy increased throughout the study period; 89% or more received combination ART from 2004 through 2006. Only 1 of the 111 infants (0.9%) was confirmed to be HIV infected, and that infant was born to a woman with no prenatal care. CONCLUSIONS: High rates of HIV testing using an opt-out approach, combined with efforts by a multidisciplinary team, resulted in a low rate of perinatal HIV transmission in our cohort. The added value of retesting high-risk women late in pregnancy or with rapid HIV tests at the time of delivery 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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 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".