ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2024
A Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Risk Assessment Tool for Women Aged 15-49 Years in African Countries: A Pooled Analysis Across 15 Nationally Representative Surveys.
Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Effect of enhanced peer PrEP referral with HIV self-testing delivery among young Kenyan women: A randomized controlled trial of peer networks.PLoS medicine · 2026Trial
- Examining the effect of universal testing and treatment strategies for HIV prevention in Zambia and South Africa: generalizing the results of the HPTN 071 (PopART) trial.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2025Trial
- An HIV-1 Risk Assessment Tool for Men Aged 15-59 years in 13 African Countries: A Pooled Analysis of Nationally Representative Surveys.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2026Article
- The HIV/AIDS response as we knew it is over: Where do we go from here?Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2026Review
- Individual and population-level risk factors for new HIV infections among adults in Eastern and Southern Africa.Nature communications · 2026Article
- The HIV/AIDS pandemic: where are we now?AIDS (London, England) · 2025Article
- Characterizing populations prioritized for PrEP in 19 African countries: a review of national guidance.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 10 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWomen in Africa disproportionately acquire human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). Understanding which women are most likely to acquire HIV-1 can guide focused prevention with preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Our objective was to identify women at the highest risk of HIV-1 and estimate PrEP efficiency at different sensitivity levels.
methodsNationally representative data were collected from 2015 through 2019 from 15 population-based household surveys. This analysis included women aged 15-49 who tested HIV-1 seronegative or had recent HIV-1. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression models were fit with 28 variables to predict recent HIV-1. Models were trained on the full population and internally cross-validated. Performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and number needed to treat (NNT) with PrEP to avert 1 infection.
resultsAmong 209 012 participants, 248 had recent HIV-1 infection, representing 118 million women and 402 000 (95% confidence interval [CI], 309 000-495 000) annual infections. Two variables were retained: living in a subnational area with high HIV-1 viremia and having a sexual partner living outside the home. The full-population AUC was 0.80 (95% CI, .76-.84); cross-validated AUC was 0.79 (95% CI, .75-.84). At 33% sensitivity, 130 000 cases could be averted if 7.9 million women were perfectly adherent to PrEP; NNT would be 61. At 67% sensitivity, 260 000 cases could be averted if 25.1 million women were perfectly adherent; NNT would be 96.
conclusionsThis risk assessment tool was generalizable, predictive, and parsimonious with trade-offs between reach and efficiency.
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.