Awareness of HIV serostatus by sex partners of women living with HIV in North-Central Nigeria: correlates and predictive analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-communication of HIV status among sex partners is a notable hurdle in halting transmission, largely due to socio-cultural factors. This study aimed to predict the determinants of male partners' awareness of women's serostatus. A total of 8825 women of reproductive age living with HIV who were clients at five comprehensive HIV treatment centres in Benue State, North-Central Nigeria were surveyed between June and December 2017, and 6655 reported having a sexual partner at the time of the survey selected for analysis. A regression model was used to estimate the determinants of male partner awareness of serostatus from the perspective of women. Conditional marginal analyses were conducted to evaluate the marginal effects of identified predictors on the probability of outcomes. Partners of married women were found to have greater odds of being aware of their spouse's serostatus (adjusted OR (aOR): 3.20; 95%CI: 2.13-4.81) than non-married partners. Similarly, the odds of male partner awareness increased with the years women had been on antiretroviral therapy (aOR: 1.13; 95%CI: 1.07-1.20). The probability of partners of married respondents being aware of their spouse's HIV serostatus was 97%. The conditional marginal effects of being educated to primary or higher level were 1.2 (95% CI: -0.2 to 2.7) and 1.8 (95% CI: 0.09-3.4) percentage points higher respectively when compared with women with no formal education. Being unemployed or being a trader significantly decreased the probability of partners being aware of respondents' serostatus when compared with farmers; conditional marginal effects of -6.7 (95% CI: -12.0 to -1.4) and -3.9 (95% CI: -5.7 to -2.2) percentage points, respectively. The study found that relationship status and girl-child education are factors that can improve communication of HIV status to sex partners. Policies and interventions aimed at improving the social determinants of health, and social support for healthy communications in relationships, are recommended to reduce HIV transmission between sex partners.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".