P3.149 Spatiotemporal dynamics of the hiv epidemic in brazil, 2009 to 2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction In 2015, the estimated HIV prevalence in Brazil was 0.4%. This figure has been stable in recent years, but it can mask disparities among regions. In this study we present the spatial distribution of the variation in HIV incidence rates(IR) in Brazilian municipalities from 2009–14 and assess the existence of spatial clustering of increase or decrease in these IR. Methods We used the AIDS reporting system(Sinan) and programmatic data on Viral Load(VL) exams and ARVs. The diagnosis date used was the earliest among 1st detectable VL, 1st ARV dispensation or diagnosis date in Sinan. Annual IR were generated by municipality. To smooth the IR, we used 3 year averages and applied the local empirical Bayesian method. To assess IR time trends, we calculated the percent IR variations in the period. For spatial statistical analysis, a simple adjacency matrix was generated, and Global and Local Moran’s I autocorrelation tests were applied. Results The Global Moran’s I for the IR variation was 0.42 (p<0.001) which points to spatial clustering. We generated 2 maps, one for the percent IR variation and another to represent the statistically significant high-high and low-low clusters. In the 1st, we observed that most municipalities in the North(N) and Center-West(CW) present increases in the period; in the Southeast(SE), the state of Sao Paulo(SP) reveals the most relevant decreases in the country; the Northeast(NE), South(S) and some areas of the SE show mixed patterns. The 2nd map makes regional disparities even clearer. There are big clusters of increasing IR in most states of the N, and smaller ones in areas of the CW and NE. Several clusters of declining IR are seen in SP, Minas Gerais(SE), Santa Catarina, Rio Grande do Sul(S), and areas of the NE. Conclusion Spatial dependency in HIV IR variations in Brazil was evidenced. The methods used in this study have proved useful in monitoring spatiotemporal trends, pointing out important regional differences. Similar analysis can be performed at state and city levels, contributing to improved diagnoses of local epidemics.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".