Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36911795›Full record

ArticleInformatics in medicine unlocked2023

Utility of a machine-guided tool for assessing risk behaviour associated with contracting HIV in three sites in South Africa.

M Majam, B Segal, J Fieggen, Eli Smith, L Hermans, L Singh, M Phatsoane, L Arora, S T Lalla-Edward

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Informatics in medicine unlocked, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Machine learning for personalized risk assessment of HIV, syphilis, gonorrhoea and chlamydia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

9 authors.

M MajamEzintsha, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
B SegalPhithos Technologies, Johannesburg, South Africa.
J FieggenPhithos Technologies, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Eli SmithPhithos Technologies, Johannesburg, South Africa.
L HermansEzintsha, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
L SinghEzintsha, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
M PhatsoaneEzintsha, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
L AroraPhithos Technologies, Johannesburg, South Africa.
S T Lalla-EdwardEzintsha, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Digital data collection and the associated mobile health technologies have allowed for the recent exploration of artificial intelligence as a tool for combatting the HIV epidemic. Machine learning has been found to be useful both in HIV risk prediction and as a decision support tool for guiding pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) treatment. This paper reports data from two sequential studies evaluating the viability of using machine learning to predict the susceptibility of adults to HIV infection using responses from a digital survey deployed in a high burden, low-resource setting. Methods: 1036 and 593 participants were recruited across two trials. The first trial was a cross-sectional study in one location and the second trial was a cohort study across three trial sites. The data from the studies were merged, partitioned using standard techniques, and then used to train and evaluate multiple different machine learning models and select and evaluate a final model. Variable importance estimates were calculated using the PIMP and SHAP methodologies. Results: Characteristics associated with HIV were consistent across both studies. Overall, HIV positive patients had a higher median age (34 [IQR: 29-39] vs 26 [IQR 22-33], p < 0.001), and were more likely to be female (155/703 [22%] vs 107/927 [12%], p < 0.001). HIV positive participants also had more commonly gone a year or more since their last HIV test (183/262 [70%] vs 540/1368 [39%], p < 0.001) and were less likely to report consistent condom usage (113/262 [43%] vs 758/1368 [55%], p < 0.001). Patients who reported TB symptoms were more likely to be HIV positive. The trained models had accuracy values (AUROCs) ranging from 78.5% to 82.8%. A boosted tree model performed best with a sensitivity of 84% (95% CI 72-92), specificity of 71% (95% CI 67-76), and a negative predictive value of 95% (95% CI 93-96) in a hold-out dataset. Age, duration since last HIV test, and number of male sexual partners were consistently three of the four most important variables across both variable importance estimates. Conclusions: This study has highlighted the synergies present between mobile health and machine learning in HIV. It has been demonstrated that a viable ML model can be built using digital survey data from an low-middle income setting with potential utility in directing health resources.

Indexed as

HIVHIV risk AssessmentMachine guided toolMachine learningMLPredictive analysisPrEPSupervised learning

Identifiers

PMID36911795
PMCPMC9993399

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.