Prevalence of hepatitis B, C, and D virus infection in Haiti: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Viral hepatitis causes an important global health burden. In 2016, the World Health Assembly adopted an objective to globally eliminate this as a public health threat by 2030. However, significant gaps exist between countries in their progress. Haiti is the last country that has introduced infant hepatitis B vaccines into the routine immunization program in the Region of the Americas, and its schedule still does not incorporate birth dose vaccines. As the first step to raise awareness of viral hepatitis in this country, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the prevalence of hepatitis B (HBV), C (HCV), and D (HDV) viruses in Haiti. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Scopus for studies reporting the prevalence of HBV, HCV and HDV among Haitian, with no language restriction, published until November 30th, 2021. Prevalence was pooled via a random-effects meta-analysis using a generalized linear mixed model with the logit link. Results Of 453 articles retrieved, 25 studies were included: 16 reported the prevalence of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), three for anti-HCV antibody, and six for both HBsAg and anti-HCV. No study was found for HDV prevalence. The pooled prevalence of HBsAg was 0.7% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.3–1.4, I2 = 77.7%] among children, 3.5% (95% CI: 2.8–4.4, I2 = 93.2%) in the general adult population and 7.4% (95% CI: 4.0–13.3, I2 = 83.9%) in high-risk adult population. The pooled prevalence of anti-HCV antibody was 0.9% (95% CI: 0.6–1.4, I2 = 93.5%) among the general population and 1.4% (95% CI: 0.4–4.2, I2 = 0.0%) in high-risk adult population. No study reported the prevalence of anti-HCV antibody exclusively in children. Interpretation The prevalence of blood-borne hepatitis, particularly that of HBV, is substantial in Haiti. The introduction of birth dose hepatitis B vaccines and improving access to testing and treatment services should be urgently considered to meet the elimination goal. Systematic review registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022298081 , identifier: PROSPERO (CRD42022298081).
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 | 0.010 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.021 | 0.037 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".