Modelling the Impact of Antiretroviral Therapy on the Epidemic of HIV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thirty years after HIV first appeared it has killed close to 30 million people but transmission continues unchecked. In 2009, an estimated 1.8 million lives were lost and 2.6 million more people were infected with HIV [1]. To cut transmission, many social, behavioural and biomedical interventions have been developed, tested and tried but have had little impact on the epidemic in most countries. One substantial success has been the development of combination antiretroviral therapy (ART) that reduces viral load and restores immune function. This raises the possibility of using ART not only to treat people but also to prevent new HIV infections. Here we consider the impact of ART on the transmission of HIV and show how it could help to control the epidemic. Much needs to be known and understood concerning the impact of early treatment with ART on the prognosis for individual patients and on transmission. We review the current literature on factors associated with modelling treatment for prevention and illustrate the potential impact using existing models. We focus on generalized epidemics in sub- Saharan Africa, with an emphasis on South Africa, where transmission is mainly heterosexual and which account for an estimated 17% of all people living with HIV. We also make reference to epidemics among men who have sex with men and injection drug users where appropriate. We discuss ways in which using treatment as prevention can be taken forward knowing that this can only be the beginning of what must become an inclusive dialogue among all of those concerned to stop acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS).
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 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".