Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24009750›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2013

Representation of women and pregnant women in HIV research: a limited systematic review.

Daniel Westreich, Molly Rosenberg, Sheree Schwartz, Geeta Swamy

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. HIV Risk Reduction Interventions Among Substance-Abusing Reproductive-Age Women: A Systematic Review.AIDS education and prevention : official publication of the International Society for AIDS Education · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Screening and Enrollment by Sex in Human Immunodeficiency Virus Clinical Trials in the United States.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Daniel WestreichDepartment of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA. djw@unc.edu
Molly Rosenberg
Sheree Schwartz
Geeta Swamy

Funding

Social and Behavioral Sciences CoreP30AI064518 · NIAID · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI GEORGIA Doris TOMARAS · 2005 to 2026
$50.5M
Carolina Population CenterR24HD050924 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI MORGAN, SAMUEL PHILIP · 2005 to 2014
$10.0M
Pregnancy and Response to Antiretroviral Therapy in South AfricaR00HD063961 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI WESTREICH, DANIEL J · 2010 to 2012
$687k
NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI064518NIAID NIH HHS P30-AI-064518NICHD NIH HHS R00 HD063961NICHD NIH HHS R00-HD-06-3961NICHD NIH HHS R24 HD050924
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHIV-related outcomes may be affected by biological sex and by pregnancy. Including women in general and pregnant women in particular in HIV-related research is important for generalizability of findings.

objectiveTo characterize representation of pregnant and non-pregnant women in HIV-related research conducted in general populations. DATA SOURCES: All HIV-related articles published in fifteen journals from January to March of 2011. We selected the top five journals by 2010 impact factor, in internal medicine, infectious diseases, and HIV/AIDS. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: HIV-related studies reporting original research on questions applicable to both men and women of reproductive age were considered; studies were excluded if they did not include individual-level patient data. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS

methodsArticles were doubly reviewed and abstracted; discrepancies were resolved through consensus. We recorded proportion of female study participants, whether pregnant women were included or excluded, and other key factors.

resultsIn total, 2014 articles were published during this period. After screening, 259 articles were included as original HIV-related research reporting individual-level data; of these, 226 were determined to be articles relevant to both men and women of reproductive age. In these articles, women were adequately represented within geographic region. The vast majority of published articles, 183/226 (81%), did not mention pregnancy (or related issues); still fewer included pregnant women (n=33), reported numbers of pregnant women (n=19), or analyzed using pregnancy status (n=9). LIMITATIONS: Data were missing for some key variables, including pregnancy. The time period over which published works were evaluated was relatively short. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY

findingsThe under-reporting and inattention to pregnancy in the HIV literature may reduce policy-makers' ability to set evidence-based policy around HIV/AIDS care for pregnant women and women of child-bearing age.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsPregnant PeopleBiomedical ResearchFemaleHumansJournal Impact FactorPeriodicals as TopicPregnancySex Factors

Identifiers

PMID24009750
PMCPMC3751870

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.