ArticlePLOS global public health2023
Estimating HIV incidence over a decade in Zimbabwe: A comparison of the catalytic and Farrington models.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the years, numerous modelling studies have been proposed to estimate HIV incidence. As a result, this study aimed to evaluate two alternative methods for predicting HIV incidence in Zimbabwe between 2005 and 2015. We estimated HIV incidence from seroprevalence data using the catalytic and Farrington-2-parameter models. Data were obtained from 2005-06, 2010-11, and 2015 Zimbabwe Demographic Health Survey (ZDHS). These models were validated at the micro and macro-level using community-based cohort incidence and empirical estimates from UNAIDS EPP/SPECTRUM, respectively. The HIV incidence for the catalytic model was 0.32% (CI: 0.28%, 0.36%), 0.36% (CI: 0.33%, 0.39%), and 0.28% (CI: 0.26%, 0.30%), for the years 2005-06, 2010-11, and 2015, respectively. The HIV incidence for the Farrington model was 0.21% (CI: 0.16%, 0.26%), 0.22% (CI: 0.20%, 0.25%), and 0.19% (CI: 0.16%, 0.22%), for the years 2005-06, 2010-11, and 2015, respectively. According to these findings, the catalytic model estimated a higher HIV incidence rate than the Farrington model. Compared to cohort estimates, the estimates were within the observed 95% confidence interval, with 88% and 75% agreement for the catalytic and Farrington models, respectively. The limits of agreement observed in the Bland-Altman plot were narrow for all plots, indicating that our model estimates were comparable to cohort estimates. Compared to UNAIDS estimates, the catalytic model predicted a progressive increase in HIV incidence for males throughout all survey years. Without a doubt, HIV incidence declined with each subsequent survey year for all models. To improve programmatic and policy decisions in the national HIV response, we recommend the triangulation of multiple methods for incidence estimation and interpretation of results. Multiple estimating approaches should be considered to reduce uncertainty in the estimations from various models.
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.