Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32602653›Full record

ArticleJournal of the International AIDS Society2020

A tale of two cascades: promoting a standardized tool for monitoring progress in HIV prevention.

Judith D Auerbach, Annette Am Gerritsen, Gina Dallabetta, Michelle Morrison, Geoffrey P Garnett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the International AIDS Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

5 authors.

Judith D AuerbachDepartment of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3508-9888
Annette Am GerritsenEpiResult, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa.
Gina DallabettaHIV Delivery, TB/HIV Team, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Washington, DC, USA.
Michelle MorrisonHIV Epidemiology and Surveillance, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, WA, USA.
Geoffrey P GarnettData and Metrics, TB/HIV Team, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, WA, USA.

Funding

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTo achieve significant progress in global HIV prevention from 2020 onward, it is essential to ensure that appropriate programmes are being delivered with high quality and sufficient intensity and scale and then taken up by the people who most need and want them in order to have both individual and public health impact. Yet, currently, there is no standard way of assessing this. Available HIV prevention indicators do not provide a logical set of measures that combine to show reduction in HIV incidence and allow for comparison of success (or failure) of HIV prevention programmes and for monitoring progress in meeting global targets. To redress this, attention increasingly has turned to the prospects of devising an HIV prevention cascade, similar to the now-standard HIV treatment cascade; but this has proven to be a controversial enterprise, chiefly due to the complexity of primary prevention. DISCUSSION: We address a number of core issues attendant with devising prevention cascades, including: determining the population of interest and accounting for the variability and fluidity of HIV-related risk within it; the fact that there are multiple HIV prevention methods, and many people are exposed to a package of them, rather than a single method; and choosing the final step (outcome) in the cascade. We propose two unifying models of prevention cascades-one more appropriate for programme managers and monitors and the other for researchers and programme developers-and note their relationship. We also provide some considerations related to cascade data quality and improvement.

conclusionsThe HIV prevention field has been grappling for years with the idea of developing a standardised way to regularly assess progress and to monitor and improve programmes accordingly. The cascade provides the potential to do this, but it is complicated and highly nuanced. We believe the two models proposed here reflect emerging consensus among the range of stakeholders who have been engaging in this discussion and who are dedicated to achieving global HIV prevention goals by ensuring the most appropriate and effective programmes and methods are supported.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsHumansProgram EvaluationHIV prevention cascadesHIV prevention programmesinterventionkey and vulnerable populationsprevention monitoringprogramme improvementpublic health

Identifiers

PMID32602653
PMCPMC7325507

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.