Trial reportAIDS (London, England)2008
Determining an optimal testing strategy for infants at risk for mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1 during the late postnatal period.
Trial report in AIDS (London, England), 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence for optimal HIV screening and testing intervals in HIV-negative individuals from various risk groups: A systematic review.Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2018Article
- Tracing defaulters in HIV prevention of mother-to-child transmission programmes through community health workers: results from a rural setting in Zimbabwe.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the optimal time for a second HIV-1 nucleic acid amplification assay to detect late postnatal transmission of HIV-1 (first negative test at 4-8 weeks of age) in resource-limited settings.
designA longitudinal analysis of data from HIV Prevention Trial Network trial 024.
methodsChildren born to HIV-1-infected mothers enrolled in the HIV Prevention Trial Network trial 024 were tested for HIV-1 infection at six intervals within the first year of life. Mothers and infants received nevirapine prophylaxis. We estimated the probability of being alive and having a positive test in each interval after 4-8 weeks and at 30 days after weaning, conditional on having acquired HIV during the late postnatal period. The interval with the highest probability was taken to be the optimal visit interval.
resultsA total of 1609 infants from HIV Prevention Trial Network trial 024 had at least one HIV-1 diagnostic test and were included in the analysis. We found that testing at 1 month after weaning or 12 months of age (whichever comes first) identified 81% of those infected during the late postnatal period (after 4-8 weeks) through breastfeeding. In total, 93% (95% confidence interval 89, 98) of all infected infants would be detected if tests were performed at these two time points.
conclusionIn resource-limited settings, HIV-1 PCR testing at 4-8 weeks followed by a second test at 1 month after weaning or at 1 year of age (whichever comes first), led to the identification of the vast majority of HIV-1-infected infants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.