MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394952981 · doi:10.1186/s12879-024-09303-2

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Comparison of safety and effectiveness of antiretroviral therapy regimens among pregnant women living with HIV at preconception or during pregnancy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials

2024· review· en· W4394952981 on OpenAlexaff
Fatemeh Mehrabi, Mohammad Karamouzian, Behnam Farhoudi, Shahryar Moradi Falah Langeroodi, Soheil Mehmandoost, Samaneh Abbaszadeh, Shahrzad Motaghi, Ali Mirzazadeh, Behnam Sadeghirad, Hamid Sharifi

Post-publication record

OpenAlex flags this work as retracted, but it carries no matching Retraction Watch record in this frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Infectious Diseases · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsImpactMcMaster UniversityPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersStudent Research Committee, Tabriz University of Medical SciencesKerman University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisMedicineMedical microbiologyPregnancyAntiretroviral therapyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)ObstetricsAlternative medicineReproductive medicineFamily medicineViral loadInternal medicineVirologyPathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mother-to-child transmission is the primary cause of HIV cases among children. Antiretroviral therapy (ART) plays a critical role in preventing mother-to-child transmission and reducing HIV progression, morbidity, and mortality among mothers. However, after more than two decades of ART during pregnancy, the comparative effectiveness and safety of ART medications during pregnancy are unclear, and existing evidence is contradictory. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of different ART regimens among pregnant women living with HIV at preconception or during pregnancy. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science. We included randomized trials that enrolled pregnant women living with HIV and randomized them to receive ART for at least four weeks. Pairs of reviewers independently completed screening for eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Our outcomes of interest included low birth weight, stillbirth, preterm birth, mother-to-child transmission of HIV, neonatal death, and congenital anomalies. Network meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects frequentist model, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We found 14 eligible randomized trials enrolling 9,561 pregnant women. The median duration of ART uptake ranged from 6.0 to 17.4 weeks. No treatment was statistically better than a placebo in reducing the rate of neonatal mortality, stillbirth, congenital defects, preterm birth, or low birth weight deliveries. Compared to placebo, zidovudine (ZDV)/lamivudine (3TC) and ZDV monotherapy likely reduce mother-to-child transmission (odds ratio (OR): 0.13; 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.31, high-certainty; and OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.74, moderate-certainty). Moderate-certainty evidence suggested that ZDV/3TC was associated with decreased odds of stillbirth (OR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.09 to 2.60). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis provides high- to moderate-certainty evidence that ZDV/3TC and ZDV are more effective in reducing the odds of mother-to-child transmission, with ZDV/3TC also demonstrating decreased odds of stillbirth. Notably, our findings suggest an elevated odds of stillbirth and preterm birth associated with all other ART regimens.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.122
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.122
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.006
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0070.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.002

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.313 · 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.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Infectious DiseasesSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207