Compliance with recommendations for routine HIV screening during pregnancy in Halifax
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The routine offering of testing for HIV during each pregnancy is recommended by various advisory bodies, including the Canadian Paediatric Society. OBJECTIVES: To determine the proportion of women in Nova Scotia who were counselled about HIV and HIV testing during their pregnancies and to determine the proportion of those who underwent the blood test after counselling. METHODS: A Self-administered survey at the IWK Health Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia was performed. Questionnaires were distributed to 800 new mothers who delivered a child between March 10 and May 10, 2000. The questionnaire asked women for their ages, levels of education, history of previous deliveries, whether they had received counselling about HIV during their pregnancy, whether they were offered an HIV blood test and whether they underwent an HIV blood test. RESULTS: A total of 155 questionnaires were returned (response rate of 19.4%). The proportion of women who were counselled about HIV during their pregnancy was 65 of 155 (41.9%) (95% CI 34.1 to 49.7) and the proportion of those who were counselled who underwent the test was 47 of 65 (72.3%) (95% CI 65.3 to 79.3). There was a significant difference between the proportion counselled and history of previous deliveries (P=0.050), the proportion offered a test and their ages (P=0.028), and the proportion who had a test done and their ages (P=0.017). CONCLUSIONS: There is inadequate compliance with the recommendation that all women be offered HIV testing during each pregnancy at the IWK Health Centre. Health care professionals involved in obstetrics need to be reminded of the importance of HIV counselling and testing during pregnancy. Further evaluation throughout Canada of the effect of HIV screening recommendations during pregnancy is advisable.
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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".