The Risk of Human Immunodeficiency Virus–1 Infection in Twin Pairs Born to Infected Mothers in Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined birth order and delivery route as risk factors for mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 in 315 twin pairs born in Malawi during 1994-1998. No antiretroviral drugs were administered to these subjects. Infections were detected by polymerase chain reaction and were stratified as having occurred either in utero, perinatally, or postnatally. Risk of in utero infection for 630 infants (39 infections) did not differ by birth order (first born, 6.3%; second born, 6.0%). Similarly, in 260 vaginally delivered infants evaluated for perinatal infection (45 infections), risk did not differ by birth order (first born, 15.9%; second born, 18.7%); risk of perinatal infection was significantly lower in cesarean-delivered infants (odds ratio, 0.19 [95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.78]). There was no effect on postnatal transmission rates. Thus, in contrast to the authors of earlier studies, we did not find birth order to be an important risk factor for infection in twins. These findings indicate that birth-canal exposure is not a major contributor to a newborn's risk of HIV-1 infection.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".