ArticleJournal of global infectious diseases2013
HIV-2 Infection: Where Are We Today?
Article in Journal of global infectious diseases, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 2: The Neglected Threat.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Seroprevalence of HIV-2 and dual infection among HIV-infected individuals with clinical and laboratory features at a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital, Mangalore: The present scenario.Annals of African medicineArticle
- ConcurrentTropical parasitologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextThe choice of antiretroviral therapy for HIV-2 differs from that for HIV-1, underscoring the importance of differentiating between the two.
aimsThe current study was planned to find out the prevalence of HIV-2 infection at our center and to find out the utility of the current diagnostic algorithm in identifying the type of HIV infection. SETTING AND
designRetrospective analysis in a tertiary care teaching institute over a period of three years. MATERIALS AND
methodsAll patients diagnosed as HIV infected using NACO/WHO HIV testing strategy III were included in the study. They were classified as HIV-1 infected, HIV-2 infected and HIV-1 and HIV-2 co-infected based on their test results. For discordant samples, immunoblotting result from National Reference Laboratory was considered as final. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Comparison between HIV-1, HIV-2 and HIV-1+2 positive groups for age, gender, route of transmission was made using chi squared test. P value < 0.05 was considered as significant.
resultsOf the total of 66,708 patients tested, 5,238 (7.9%) were positive for HIV antibodies. 7.62%, 0.14%, 0.08% and 0.004% were HIV-1, HIV-2, HIV-1 and HIV-2 co-infected and HIV type indeterminate (HIV-1 Indeterminate, 2+) respectively. The current algorithm could not differentiate between the types of HIV infection (as HIV-1 or HIV-2) in 63 (1.2%) cases.
conclusionIn areas like the Indian subcontinent, where epidemic of both HIV-1 and HIV-2 infections are ongoing, it is important to modify the current diagnostic algorithms to diagnose and confirm HIV-2 infections.
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.