Risk of transmission of HIV to infants during breast/chest feeding when mothers/birthing parents living with HIV are on antiretroviral therapy: a protocol for a rapid review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: HIV is a major public health issue affecting millions globally. Women and girls account for 46% of new HIV infections in 2022 and approximately 1.3 million females become pregnant every year. Vertical transmission of HIV from persons living with HIV (PLHIV) to infants may occur through different modalities, such as through breast/chest feeding. Notably, 82% of PLHIV who chose to breast/chest feed are on antiretroviral therapy (ART) when feeding their infants. Precise estimates of the risk of postpartum transmission to infants during breast/chest feeding at varying viral load levels remain a significant gap in the literature. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A rapid systematic search of electronic databases will be conducted from January 2005 to the present, including Medline, Embase and Global Health. The objective of this rapid review is to explore and assess the available evidence on the effect of varying viral load levels on the risk of HIV transmission to infants during breast/chest feeding when the birthing or gestational parent living with HIV is on ART. Study characteristics will be summarised and reported to support the narrative summary of the findings. The focus will be on the absolute risk of HIV transmission from birthing parent to infant during chest/breast feeding. The findings will also be stratified by month, including the risk of HIV transmission for 6 months and greater than 6 months postpartum. We will ascertain the risk of bias using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2, Quality of Prognosis Studies and Downs and Black checklist for the appropriate study type. A summary score will not be calculated, rather the strengths and limitations of the studies will be narratively described. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No human subjects will be involved in the research. The findings of this rapid review will inform a future systematic review and will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, presentations and conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024499393.
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 | 0.060 | 0.091 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.022 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.019 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.044 | 0.006 |
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".