MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406854061 · doi:10.2196/59916

The Application of Machine Learning Algorithms to Predict HIV Testing in Repeated Adult Population–Based Surveys in South Africa: Protocol for a Multiwave Cross-Sectional Analysis

2025· article· en· W4406854061 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Musa Jaiteh, Edith Phalane, Yegnanew A. Shiferaw, Nancy Phaswana‐Mafuya

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePopulationCross-sectional studyMachine learningLogistic regressionPsychological interventionCross-validationTest (biology)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceEnvironmental healthPathologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background HIV testing is the cornerstone of HIV prevention and a pivotal step in realizing the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) goal of ending AIDS by 2030. Despite the availability of relevant survey data, there exists a research gap in using machine learning (ML) to analyze and predict HIV testing among adults in South Africa. Further investigation is needed to bridge this knowledge gap and inform evidence-based interventions to improve HIV testing. Objective This study aims to determine consistent predictors of HIV testing by applying supervised ML algorithms in repeated adult population-based surveys in South Africa. Methods A retrospective analysis of multiwave cross-sectional survey data will be conducted to determine the predictors of HIV testing among South African adults aged 18 years and older. A supervised ML technique will be applied across the five cycles of the South African National HIV Prevalence, Incidence, Behavior, and Communication Survey (SABSSM) surveys. The Human Science Research Council (HSRC) conducted the SABSSM surveys in 2002, 2005, 2008, 2012, and 2017. The available SABSSM datasets will be imported to RStudio (version 4.3.2; Posit Software, PBC) to clean and remove outliers. A chi-square test will be conducted to select important predictors of HIV testing. Each dataset will be split into 80% training and 20% test samples. Logistic regression, support vector machines, random forests, and decision trees will be used. A cross-validation technique will be used to divide the training sample into k-folds, including a validation set, and models will be trained on each fold. The models’ performance will be evaluated on the validation set using evaluation metrics such as accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, area under curve-receiver operating characteristics, and confusion matrix. Results The SABSSM datasets are open access datasets available on the HSRC database. Ethics approval for this study was obtained from the University of Johannesburg Research and Ethics Committee on April 23, 2024 (REC-2725-2024). The authors were given access to all five SABSSM datasets by the HSRC on August 20, 2024. The datasets were explored to identify the independent variables likely influencing HIV testing uptake. The findings of this study will determine consistent variables predicting HIV testing uptake among the South African adult population over the course of 20 years. Furthermore, this study will evaluate and compare the performance metrics of the 4 different ML algorithms, and the best model will be used to develop an HIV testing predictive model. Conclusions This study will contribute to existing knowledge and deepen understanding of factors linked to HIV testing beyond traditional methods. Consequently, the findings would inform evidence-based policy recommendations that can guide policy makers to formulate more effective and targeted public health approaches toward strengthening HIV testing. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/59916

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)0.056
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0560.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.013

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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.545
Teacher spread0.370 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions→French-language works237,207→