ArticlePloS one2020
Factors associated with HIV serodiscordance among couples in Mozambique: Comparison of the 2009 INSIDA and 2015 IMASIDA surveys.
Article in PloS one, 2020. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent studies suggest that a large proportion of new HIV-1 infections in mature epidemics occurs within discordant couples, making discordancy a major contributor to the spread of HIV/AIDS in Africa. This paper aims at assessing changes over a five-year period (2009-2015) on the (risk) factors associated with HIV serodiscordance among couples in Mozambique, using cross-sectional data from the INSIDA and IMASIDA surveys. The pooled data of both surveys were analyzed using a joint model for three parameters characterizing in a particular way disagreement and sero(con/dis)corance between the HIV statuses of couples, as introduced by Aerts et al.: the probability that the female partner is HIV positive, given that both partners differ in their HIV status, the probability that only one partner is HIV positive, given that at least one of the two partners is positive ("positive" serodiscordance), and the probability that both partners are negative given that at most one of the two partners is positive ("negative" seroconcordance). The results reveal similar significant factors and estimates as in Aerts et al. (HIV prevalence, union number for woman, STI for man, condom use by woman and wealth index), but the additional significant factors "condom use by man" (no use had a negative effect on the positive serodiscordance) and "union number for man" (for couples where the man has been married or co-habiting with a woman before had a decreased negative seroconcordance) were identified. The only factor that had a different effect over time (IMASIDA as compared to INSIDA) was the effect of "HIV prevalence of province" on the negative seroconcordance. The negative effect of a higher HIV prevalence was less pronounced in 2015 for negative seroconcordance.
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.