MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999031325 · doi:10.1002/jia2.25432

HIV seroconcordance among heterosexual couples in rural KwaZulu‐Natal, South Africa: a population‐based analysis

2020· article· en· W2999031325 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hae‐Young Kim, Guy Harling, Alain Vandormael, Andrew Tomita, Diego Cuadros, Till Bärnighausen, Frank Tanser

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the International AIDS Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNYU Grossman School of MedicineEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public HealthNational Institutes of HealthYork UniversityInyuvesi Yakwazulu-NataliNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesMedical Research CouncilUniversität HeidelbergHarvard T.H. Chan School of Public HealthSouth African Medical Research CouncilUniversity College LondonAcademy of Medical SciencesWellcome TrustUniversity of Cincinnati
KeywordsDemographyMedicinePopulationHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Incidence (geometry)Rural areaHeterosexualityEnvironmental healthHomosexualityVirologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: High levels of HIV seroconcordance at the population level reduce the potential for effective HIV transmission. However, the level of HIV seroconcordance is largely unknown among heterosexual couples in sub-Saharan Africa. We aimed to quantify the population level HIV seroconcordance in stable heterosexual couples in rural South Africa. METHODS: We followed adults (≥15 years old) using a population-based, longitudinal and open surveillance system in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, from 2003 to 2016. Sexual partnerships and HIV status were confirmed via household surveys and annual HIV surveillance. We calculated the proportions of HIV seroconcordance and serodiscordance in stable sexual partnerships and compared them to the expected proportions under the assumption of random mixing using individual-based microsimulation models. Among unpartnered individuals, we estimated the incidence rates and hazard of sexual partnership formation with HIV-positive or HIV-negative partners by participants' own time-varying HIV status. Competing risks survival regressions were fitted adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical factors. We also calculated Newman's assortativity coefficients. RESULTS: A total of 18,341 HIV-negative and 11,361 HIV-positive individuals contributed 154,469 person-years (PY) of follow-up. Overall, 28% of the participants were in stable sexual partnerships. Of the 677 newly formed stable sexual partnerships, 7.7% (95% CI: 5.8 to 10.0) were HIV-positive seroconcordant (i.e. both individuals in the partnership were HIV-positive), which was three times higher than the expected proportion (2.3%) in microsimulation models based on random mixing. The incidence rates of sexual partnership formation were 0.54/1000PY with HIV-positive, 1.12/1000PY with HIV-negative and 2.65/1000PY with unknown serostatus partners. HIV-positive individuals had 2.39 (95% CI: 1.43 to 3.99) times higher hazard of forming a sexual partnership with an HIV-positive partner than did HIV-negative individuals after adjusting for age, opposite-sex HIV prevalence (by 5-years age groups), HIV prevalence in the surrounding community, ART coverage and other sociodemographic factors. Similarly, forming a sexual partnership with an HIV-negative partner was 1.47 (95% CI: 1.01 to 2.14) times higher in HIV-negative individuals in the adjusted model. Newman's coefficient also showed that assortativity by participant and partner HIV status was moderate (r = 0.35). CONCLUSIONS: A high degree of population level HIV seroconcordance (both positive and negative) was observed at the time of forming new sexual partnerships. Understanding factors driving these patterns may help the development of strategies to bring the HIV epidemic under control.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the International AIDS SocietySame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207