HPV Type Distribution and Cervical Cytology among HIV-Positive Tanzanian and South African Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. There are limited data on high-risk human papillomavirus (hr-HPV) genotypes among HIV-positive women in Africa, and little is known about their relationship with cervical cytology in these populations. Methods. We conducted a cross-sectional study among 194 HIV-positive women (143 from Tanzania, and 51 from South Africa) to evaluate HPV genotypes among HIV-positive women with normal and abnormal cytology. Cervical samples were genotyped for HPV types, and slides were evaluated for atypical squamous cell changes according to the Bethesda classification system. Results. Prevalence of high grade squamous intraepithelial dysplasia (HSIL) was 9%. Overall, more than half (56%) of women were infected with an hr-HPV type; 94% of women with HSIL (n = 16), 90% of women with LSIL (n = 35), and 42% of women within normal limits (WNL) (n = 58) tested positive for hr-HPV. Overall, the most prevalent hr-HPV subtypes were HPV16 (26%) and HPV52 (30%). Regional differences in the prevalence of HPV18 and HPV35 were found. Conclusion. Regional differences in HPV genotypes among African women warrant the need to consider different monitoring programmes for cervical preneoplasia. HPV-based screening tests for cervical preneoplasia would be highly inefficient unless coupled with cytology screening of the HPV-positive sample, especially in HIV-positive women.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".