ArticleMedicine2019
External validation of a prediction tool to estimate the risk of human immunodeficiency virus infection amongst men who have sex with men.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk prediction models for targeted testing of HIV, hepatitis B and hepatitis C: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Performance of HIV Infection Prediction Models in Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Archives of sexual behavior · 2023Pooled it
- Risk-Based Screening Tools to Optimise HIV Testing Services: a Systematic Review.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2022Pooled it
- Using HIV Risk Self-Assessment Tools to Increase HIV Testing in Men Who Have Sex With Men in Beijing, China: App-Based Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Trial
- Impact of Post-exposure Prophylaxis on Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Initiation Among Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Nested Case-control Study.AIDS and behavior · 2026Article
- Preliminary evaluation of a gamified smartphone intervention (O2O-PEP) for enhancing HIV post-exposure prophylaxis uptake in men who have sex with men: pilot feasibility study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Associations between perceived and actual risk of HIV infection and HIV prevention services uptake among men who have sex with men in Shandong province, China: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2024Article
- An integrated online-to-offline model for HIV post-exposure prophylaxis (O2O-PEP) scale-up among men who have sex with men (MSM): Protocol for developing a pilot randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) risk assessment tool was previously developed for predicting HIV infection among men who have sex with men (MSM), but was not externally validated. We evaluated the tool's validity for predicting HIV infection in an independent cohort.The tool was assessed using data from a retrospective cohort study of HIV-negative adult MSM who were recruited in Beijing, China between January 2009 and December 2016.High-risk behaviors occurring within 6 months before the survey were evaluated. Area under curve (AUC) of the receiver operating character curve (ROC) was used to quantify discrimination performance; calibration curve and Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic were used for calibration performance valuation; and decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to evaluate clinical usage.One thousand four hundred forty two participants from the cohort were included in the analysis; 246 (17.1%) sero-converted during follow-up. External validation of the tool showed good calibration, the Hosmer-Lemeshow test showed no statistical difference between observed probability and tool-based predictive probability of HIV infection (X = 4.55, P = .80). The tool had modest discrimination ability (AUC = 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61-0.66). The decision curve analysis indicated that implementing treatment measures based on the tool's predicative risk thresholds ranging from 10% to 30% might increase the net benefit of treatment when compared with treating all or no MSM.The HIV risk assessment tool can predict the actual risk of HIV infection well amongst MSM in China, but it has a moderate ability to discriminate those at high risk of HIV infection.
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.