ArticleStatistical communications in infectious diseases2018
Cross-Sectional HIV Incidence Estimation with Missing Biomarkers.
Article in Statistical communications in infectious diseases, 2018. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Considerable progress has been made in the development of approaches for HIV incidence estimation based on a cross-sectional survey for biomarkers of recent infection. Multiple biomarkers when used in combination can increase the precision of cross-sectional HIV incidence estimates. Multi-assay algorithms (MAAs) for cross-sectional HIV incidence estimation are hierarchical stepwise algorithms for testing the biological samples with multiple biomarkers. The objective of this paper is to consider some of the statistical challenges for addressing the problem of missing biomarkers in such testing algorithms. We consider several methods for handling missing biomarkers for (1) estimating the mean window period, and (2) estimating HIV incidence from a cross sectional survey once the mean window period has been determined. We develop a conditional estimation approach for addressing the missing data challenges and compare that method with two naïve approaches. Using MAAs developed for HIV subtype B, we evaluate the methods by simulation. We show that the two naïve estimation methods lead to biased results in most of the missing data scenarios considered. The proposed conditional approach protects against bias in all of the scenarios.
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.