ArticleAIDS care2009
Discussion and revision of the mathematical modeling tool described in the previously published article "Modeling HIV Transmission risk among Mozambicans prior to their initiating highly active antiretroviral therapy".
Article in AIDS care, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mathematical models are increasingly used in social and behavioral studies of HIV transmission; however, model structures must be chosen carefully to best answer the question at hand and conclusions must be interpreted cautiously. In Pearson et al. (2007), we presented a simple analytically tractable deterministic model to estimate the number of secondary HIV infections stemming from a population of HIV-positive Mozambicans and to evaluate how the estimate would change under different treatment and behavioral scenarios. In a subsequent application of the model with a different data set, we observed that the model produced an unduly conservative estimate of the number of new HIV-1 infections. In this brief report, our first aim is to describe a revision of the model to correct for this underestimation. Specifically, we recommend adjusting the population-level sexually transmitted infection (STI) parameters to be applicable to the individual-level model specification by accounting for the proportion of individuals uninfected with an STI. In applying the revised model to the original data, we noted an estimated 40 infections/1000 HIV-positive persons per year (versus the original 23 infections/1000 HIV-positive persons per year). In addition, the revised model estimated that highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) along with syphilis and herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2) treatments combined could reduce HIV-1 transmission by 72% (versus 86% according to the original model). The second aim of this report is to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of mathematical models in the field and the implications of model interpretation. We caution that simple models should be used for heuristic purposes only. Since these models do not account for heterogeneity in the population and significantly simplify HIV transmission dynamics, they should be used to describe general characteristics of the epidemic and demonstrate the importance or sensitivity of parameters in the model.
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.