Implementation of Antiretroviral Therapy for Life in Pregnant/Breastfeeding HIV+ Women (Option B+) Alongside Rollout and Changing Guidelines for ART Initiation in Rural Zimbabwe: The Lablite Project Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lifelong antiretroviral therapy (ART) for pregnant and breastfeeding women (Option B+) was rolled out in Zimbabwe from 2014, with simultaneous raising of the CD4 treatment threshold to 500 cells per cubic millimeter in nonpregnant/breastfeeding adults and children 5 years and over. METHODS: Lablite is an implementation project in Zimbabwe, Malawi, and Uganda evaluating ART rollout. Routine patient-level data were collected for 6 months before and 12 months after Option B+ rollout at a district hospital and 3 primary care facilities in Zimbabwe (2 with outreach ART and 1 with no ART provision before Option B+). RESULTS: Between September 2013 and February 2015, there were 1686 ART initiations in the 4 facilities: 91% adults and 9% children younger than 15 years. In the 3 facilities with established ART, initiations rose from 300 during 6 months before Option B+ to 869 (2.9-fold) and 463 (1.5-fold), respectively, 0-6 months and 6-12 months after Option B+. Post-Option B+, an estimated 43% of pregnant/breastfeeding women needed ART for their own health, based on World Health Organization stage 3/4 or CD4 ≤350 per cubic millimeter (64% for CD4 ≤500). Seventy-four men (22%) and 123 nonpregnant/breastfeeding women (34%) initiated ART with CD4 >350 after the CD4 threshold increase. Estimated 12-month retention on ART was 79% (69%-87%) in Option B+ women (significantly lower in younger women, P = 0.01) versus 93% (91%-95%) in other adults (difference P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There were increased ART initiations in all patient groups after implementation of World Health Organization 2013 guidelines. Retention of Option B+ women was poorer than retention of other adults; younger women require attention because they are more likely to disengage from care.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".