Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40559734›Full record

ArticleTropical medicine and infectious disease2025

The Application of Machine Learning Algorithms to Predict HIV Testing Using Evidence from the 2002-2017 South African Adult Population-Based Surveys: An HIV Testing Predictive Model.

Musa Jaiteh, Edith Phalane, Yegnanew A Shiferaw, Haruna Jallow, Refilwe Nancy Phaswana-Mafuya

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tropical medicine and infectious disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

5 authors.

Musa JaitehSouth African Medical Research Council/University of Johannesburg Pan African Centre for Epidemics Research Extramural Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg 2006, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0001-6920-9919
Edith PhalaneSouth African Medical Research Council/University of Johannesburg Pan African Centre for Epidemics Research Extramural Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg 2006, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0001-6128-2337
Yegnanew A ShiferawDepartment of Statistics, Faculty of Science, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg 2006, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-2422-4768
Haruna JallowDepartment of Mathematics (Data Science Option), Pan African University Institute for Basic Sciences, Technology and Innovation, Juja P.O. Box 62000 00200, Kenya.
Refilwe Nancy Phaswana-MafuyaSouth African Medical Research Council/University of Johannesburg Pan African Centre for Epidemics Research Extramural Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg 2006, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0001-9387-0432

Funding

South African Medical Research Council 57035University of Johannesburg GES 4.0
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a significant portion of the South African population with unknown HIV status, which slows down epidemic control despite the progress made in HIV testing. Machine learning (ML) has been effective in identifying individuals at higher risk of HIV infection, for whom testing is strongly recommended. However, there are insufficient predictive models to inform targeted HIV testing interventions in South Africa. By harnessing the power of supervised ML (SML) algorithms, this study aimed to identify the most consistent predictors of HIV testing in repeated adult population-based surveys in South Africa. The study employed four SML algorithms, namely, decision trees, random forest, support vector machines (SVM), and logistic regression, across the five cross-sectional cycles of the South African National HIV Prevalence, Incidence, and Behavior and Communication Survey (SABSSM) datasets. The Human Science Research Council (HSRC) conducted the SABSSM surveys and made the datasets available for this study. Each dataset was split into 80% training and 20% testing sets with a 5-fold cross-validation technique. The random forest outperformed the other models across all five datasets with the highest accuracy (80.98%), precision (81.51%), F

Indexed as

AIDSdecision treeHIVHIV testingHSRClogistic regressionmachine learningpredictive modelpredictorsrandom forestSABSSMSouth Africasupport vector machine

Identifiers

PMID40559734
PMCPMC12197452

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.