The Linda Kizazi study: a comparison of morbidity and mortality from birth to 2 years between children who are HIV-unexposed and HIV-exposed, uninfected in the era of universal antiretroviral therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Historically, children who are HIV-exposed, uninfected (CHEU) have been found to have greater morbidity and mortality than children who are HIV-unexposed, uninfected (CHUU). To assess whether this difference persists in the era of universal antiretroviral therapy (ART), we conducted a cohort study to compare the risk of acute diarrhoea, respiratory tract infections (RTI), malaria, hospitalisation, and all-cause mortality between Kenyan CHEU and CHUU from birth to 2 years. METHODS: From December 2018 to March 2020 at Mathare North Health Centre in Nairobi, we recruited pregnant women living with HIV on ART for ≥6 months and pregnant women without HIV from the same community. We followed the mother-infant pairs for 2 years post partum and collected data on symptoms of illness, clinical visits and diagnoses, and infant feeding every 3 months; a self-selected subset of participants also received weekly data collection for up to 1 year. We compared the risk of each outcome between CHEU versus CHUU using HRs from Andersen-Gill (recurrent morbidity outcomes) and Cox proportional hazards (mortality) regression models adjusted for maternal age, marital status and education level. RESULTS: Among 187 mother-infant pairs with postpartum data, 86 (46%) infants were CHEU and 101 (54%) were CHUU. All initiated breastfeeding, and 88% of CHEU and 57% of CHUU were exclusively breastfed (EBF) for ≥6 months. There was no significant difference in risk of diarrhoea (HR=0.79, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.22), malaria (HR=0.44, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.21), hospitalisation (HR=1.11, 95% CI 0.30 to 4.14), or mortality (HR=1.87, 95% CI 0.17 to 20.5). However, CHEU had lower risk of any RTI (HR=0.60, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.82) and pneumonia (HR=0.29, 95% CI 0.091 to 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: CHEU born to women on effective long-term ART experienced similar overall morbidity and mortality as CHUU. However, CHEU had substantially lower risk of pneumonia and other RTI, possibly due to longer EBF in this group.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".