Evidence for localised HIV related micro–epidemics associated with the decentralised provision of antiretroviral treatment in rural South Africa: a spatio–temporal analysis of changing mortality patterns (2007–2010)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In this study we analysed the spatial and temporal changes in patterns of mortality over a period when antiretroviral therapy (ART) was rolled out in a rural region of north-eastern South Africa. Previous studies have identified localised concentrated HIV related sub-epidemics and recommended that micro-level analyses be carried out in order to direct focused interventions. METHODS: Data from an ongoing health and socio-demographic surveillance study was used in the analysis. The follow-up was divided into two periods, 2007-2008 and 2009-2010, representing the times immediately before and after the effects on mortality of the decentralised ART provision from a newly established local health centre would be expected to be evident. The study population at the start of the analysis was approximately 73 000 individuals. Data were aggregated by village and also using a 2 × 2 km grid. We identified villages, grid squares and regions in the site where mortality rates within each time period or rate ratios between the periods differed significantly from the overall trends. We used clustering techniques to identify cause-specific mortality hotspots. FINDINGS: Comparing the two periods, there was a 30% decrease in age and gender standardised adult HIV-related and TB (HIV/TB) mortality with no change in mortality due to other causes. There was considerable spatial heterogeneity in the mortality patterns. Areas separated by 2 to 4 km with very different epidemic trajectories were identified. There was evidence that the impact of ART in reducing HIV/TB mortality was greatest in communities with higher mortality rates in the earlier period. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows the value of conducting high resolution spatial analyses in order to understand how local micro-epidemics contribute to changes seen over a wider area. Such analyses can support targeted interventions.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".