Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28034882›Full record

ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2017

A Risk Assessment Tool for Identifying Pregnant and Postpartum Women Who May Benefit From Preexposure Prophylaxis.

Jillian Pintye, Alison L Drake, John Kinuthia, Jennifer A Unger, Daniel Matemo, Renee A Heffron, Ruanne V Barnabas, Pamela Kohler, R Scott McClelland, Grace John-Stewart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 80 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

80 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 96 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Early Adopters of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Preexposure Prophylaxis in a Population-based Combination Prevention Study in Rural Kenya and Uganda.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2018
    Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

20 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Jillian PintyeDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
Alison L DrakeDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
John KinuthiaDepartment of Research and Programs, Kenyatta National Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya.
Jennifer A UngerDepartments of Global Health and Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Washington, Box 359909, Seattle, WA, USA.
Daniel MatemoDepartment of Research and Programs, Kenyatta National Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya.
Renee A HeffronDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
Ruanne V BarnabasDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
Pamela KohlerDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
R Scott McClellandDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
Grace John-StewartDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
University of Washington · USKenyatta National Hospital · KEUniversity of Nairobi · KE

Funding

University of Washington/Fred Hutch Center for AIDS ResearchP30AI027757 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Kenneth Sherr · 1988 to 2026
$104.9M
VENEREAL DISEASET32AI007140 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Julia Cook Dombrowski · 1985 to 2026
$19.4M
Vaginal Health and the Risk of HIV-1 Acquistion in Kenyan WomenP01HD064915 · NICHD · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI JOHN-STEWART, GRACE C. · 2009 to 2013
$8.9M
NRSA Training CoreTL1TR002318 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Megan Moore · 2017 to 2026
$8.4M
Delivering PrEP in PregnancyR01AI125498 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI JOHN-STEWART, GRACE C. · 2016 to 2020
$3.6M
Pediatric HIV-1 in Africa: Pathogenesis and ManagementK24HD054314 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI JOHN-STEWART, GRACE C. · 2006 to 2016
$1.2M
Optimizing repeat HIV testing during pregnancy and postpartum for PMTCTK01AI116298 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI DRAKE, ALISON L · 2015 to 2019
$632k
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR002318NIAID NIH HHS K01 AI116298NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI027757NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI125498NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007140NICHD NIH HHS K24 HD054314NICHD NIH HHS P01 HD064915
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: A human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) risk assessment tool for pregnant women could identify women who would most benefit from preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) while minimizing unnecessary PrEP exposure. Methods: Data from a prospective study of incident HIV among pregnant/postpartum women in Kenya were randomly divided into derivation (n = 654) and validation (n = 650) cohorts. A risk score was derived using multivariate Cox proportional hazards models and standard clinical prediction rules. Ability of the tool to predict maternal HIV acquisition was assessed using the area under the curve (AUC) and Brier score. Results: The final risk score included the following predictors: having a male partner with unknown HIV status, number of lifetime sexual partners, syphilis, bacterial vaginosis (BV), and vaginal candidiasis. In the derivation cohort, AUC was 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI], .72-.95) and each point increment in score was associated with a 52% (hazard ratio [HR], 1.52 [95% CI, 1.32-1.76]; P < .001) increase in HIV risk; the Brier score was 0.11. In the validation cohort, the score had similar AUC, Brier score, and estimated HRs. A simplified score that excluded BV and candidiasis yielded an AUC of 0.76 (95% CI, .67-.85); HIV incidence was higher among women with risk scores >6 than with scores ≤6 (7.3 vs 1.1 per 100 person-years, respectively; P < .001). Women with simplified scores >6 accounted for 16% of the population but 56% of HIV acquisitions. Conclusions: A combination of indicators routinely assessed in antenatal clinics was predictive of HIV risk and could be used to prioritize pregnant women for PrEP.

Indexed as

Pre-Exposure ProphylaxisAdultCoinfectionFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansIncidenceLongitudinal StudiesPostpartum PeriodPregnancyPregnancy Complications, InfectiousRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsROC CurveSelf ReportYoung AdultHIVpostpartum.preexposure prophylaxispregnancyPrEPrisk score

Identifiers

PMID28034882
PMCPMC6075205
OpenAlexW2561800806

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.