Cost-effectiveness of voluntary HIV-1 counselling and testing in reducing sexual transmission of HIV-1 in Kenya and Tanzania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Access to HIV-1 voluntary counselling and testing (VCT) is severely limited in less-developed countries. We undertook a multisite trial of HIV-1 VCT to assess its impact, cost, and cost-effectiveness in less-developed country settings. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness of HIV-1 VCT was estimated for a hypothetical cohort of 10000 people seeking VCT in urban east Africa. Outcomes were modelled based on results from a randomised controlled trial of HIV-1 VCT in Tanzania and Kenya. Our main outcome measures included programme cost, number of HIV-1 infections averted, cost per HIV-1 infection averted, and cost per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) saved. We also modelled the impact of targeting VCT by HIV-1 prevalence of the client population, and the proportion of clients who receive VCT as a couple compared with as individuals. Sensitivity analysis was done on all model parameters. FINDINGS: HIV-1 VCT was estimated to avert 1104 HIV-1 infections in Kenya and 895 in Tanzania during the subsequent year. The cost per HIV-1 infection averted was US$249 and $346, respectively, and the cost per DALY saved was $12.77 and $17.78. The intervention was most cost-effective for HIV-1-infected people and those who received VCT as a couple. The cost-effectiveness of VCT was robust, with a range for the average cost per DALY saved of $5.16-27.36 in Kenya, and $6.58-45.03 in Tanzania. Analysis of targeting showed that increasing the proportion of couples to 70% reduces the cost per DALY saved to $10.71 in Kenya and $13.39 in Tanzania, and that targeting a population with HIV-1 prevalence of 45% decreased the cost per DALY saved to $8.36 in Kenya and $11.74 in Tanzania. INTERPRETATION: HIV-1 VCT is highly cost-effective in urban east African settings, but slightly less so than interventions such as improvement of sexually transmitted disease services and universal provision of nevirapine to pregnant women in high-prevalence settings. With the targeting of VCT to populations with high HIV-1 prevalence and couples the cost-effectiveness of VCT is improved significantly.
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 | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".