Risk heterogeneity in compartmental HIV transmission models of ART as prevention in Sub-Saharan Africa: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Transmission models provide complementary evidence to clinical trials about the potential population-level incidence reduction attributable to ART (ART prevention impact). Different modelling assumptions about risk heterogeneity may influence projected ART prevention impacts. We sought to review representations of risk heterogeneity in compartmental HIV transmission models applied to project ART prevention impacts in Sub-Saharan Africa. Methods We systematically reviewed studies published before January 2020 that used non-linear compartmental models of sexual HIV transmission to simulate ART prevention impacts in Sub-Saharan Africa. We summarized data on model structure/assumptions (factors) related to risk and intervention heterogeneity, and explored multivariate ecological associations of ART prevention impacts with modelled factors. Results Of 1384 search hits, 94 studies were included. 64 studies considered sexual activity stratification and 39 modelled at least one key population. 21 studies modelled faster/slower ART cascade transitions (HIV diagnosis, ART initiation, or cessation) by risk group, including 8 with faster and 4 with slower cascade transitions among key populations versus the wider population. In ecological analysis of 125 scenarios from 40 studies (subset without combination intervention), scenarios with risk heterogeneity that included turnover of higher risk groups were associated with smaller ART prevention benefits. Modelled differences in ART cascade across risk groups also influenced the projected ART benefits, including: ART prioritized to key populations was associated with larger ART prevention benefits. Of note, zero of these 125 scenarios considered lower ART coverage among key populations. Conclusion Among compartmental transmission models applied to project ART prevention impacts in Sub-Saharan Africa, representations of risk heterogeneity and projected impacts varied considerably. Inclusion/exclusion of risk heterogeneity with turnover, and intervention heterogeneity across risk groups could influence the projected impacts of ART scale-up. These findings highlight a need to capture risk heterogeneity with turnover and cascade heterogenetiy when projecting ART prevention impacts.
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 | 0.017 | 0.079 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".