ArticleBMC public health2022
A risk measurement tool for targeted HIV prevention measures amongst young pregnant and lactating women in South Africa.
Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic performance of HIV risk assessment tools for identifying pre-exposure prophylaxis candidates: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Preventing perinatal HIV acquisition; current gaps and future perspectives.Current opinion in HIV and AIDS · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to develop and validate a tool to identify which pregnant/lactating young South African women (≤ 24 years) are at risk of HIV infection.
methodsData from three national South African Prevention of Mother-to-Child Transmission (PMTCT) evaluations were used to internally validate three HIV acquisition risk models for young postpartum women. We used univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine which risk factors were significant. Model coefficients were rounded and stratified into risk groups and the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) was computed. Models were developed to determine which risk factors provided the most predictive accuracy whilst remining clinically meaningful.
resultsData from 9 456 adult and 4 658 young pregnant and lactating women were included in the development and validation data sets, respectively. The optimal model included the following risk factors: age (20-24 years old), informal house structure, two or more pregnancies, mothers who had knowledge of when they received their last HIV test result, no knowledge of the infant's father's HIV status, no knowledge of breastfeeding as a mode of MTCT and knowledge of PMTCT programme. The mean AUROC was 0.71 and 0.72 in the development and validation datasets respectively. The optimum cut off score was ≥ 27, having 84% sensitivity, 44% specificity, and identifying 44% of high-risk women eligible for PrEP.
conclusionThe optimal model to be used as a possible risk scoring tool to allow for early identification of those pregnant/lactating women most at-risk of HIV acquisition included both statistically as well as clinically meaningful risk factors. A field-based study is needed to test and validate the effectiveness of this targeted approach.
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.