Incremental role of male circumcision on a generalised HIV epidemic through its protective effect against other sexually transmitted infections: from efficacy to effectiveness to population-level impact
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Male circumcision (MC) can reduce HIV acquisition. However, a better understanding of the indirect protective effect of MC on sexually transmitted infections (STIs) is required. OBJECTIVE: To assess the incremental benefits conferred by MC on HIV infection at the individual level in circumcision trials (no herd immunity effect) and at the population level (with herd immunity effect) owing to its protective effect against other STIs. METHODS: A dynamic stochastic model of HIV and STI infections in a Kenyan population was used to simulate the impact of MC offered to a few trial participants or to a large proportion of men in order to study the protective role of MC on HIV infection at the individual and population levels. RESULTS: Fewer than 20% of the HIV infections prevented in the circumcised arm of the circumcision trials (individual level) could be attributable to the efficacy of MC against STIs rather than against HIV. At the population level, MC can significantly reduce the prevalence of HIV, especially among men and women in the longer term. However, even at the population level, the long-term incremental impact of MC on HIV due to the protection against STI is modest (even if MC efficacy against the STI and STI prevalence was high). CONCLUSIONS: The protection of MC against STI contributes little to the overall effect of MC on HIV. Additional work is needed to determine whether, and under what conditions, the protective effect of MC efficacy against STIs can have a significant incremental benefit on the HIV epidemic.
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 | 0.016 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".