ArticleSouthern African journal of HIV medicine2017
When to start antiretroviral treatment? A history and analysis of a scientific controversy.
Article in Southern African journal of HIV medicine, 2017. 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.
- Neurocognitive Impairment and Associated Factors Among People Living with HIV: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of African Studies.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2023Review
- HIV infection in Eastern and Southern Africa: Highest burden, largest challenges, greatest potential.Southern African journal of HIV medicine · 2021Article
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
Background: Since 1987 HIV scientists and activists have debated the optimal point to start antiretroviral treatment. Positions have varied between treating people with HIV as soon as they are diagnosed, based on biological, modelling and observational evidence, versus delaying treatment until points in disease progression at which clinical trial evidence has shown unequivocally that treatment is beneficial. Objectives: Examining the conduct and resolution of this debate may provide insight into how science works in practice. It also documents an important part of the history of the HIV epidemic. Method: We describe clinical trials, observational studies, models and various documents that have advanced the debate from 1987 to 2015. Results and conclusion: Evidence accumulated over the past decade, especially from randomised controlled clinical trials, has shown that immediate treatment both reduces the mortality and the risk of HIV transmission; it benefits both public health and the individual patient. By mid-2015, the debate was resolved in favour of immediate treatment.
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.