ArticlePloS one2025
Reassessment of public awareness and prevention strategies for HIV and COVID-19 co-infections through epidemic modeling.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
- Evaluating syphilis transmission among MSM population: a mathematical model for reinfection, two-stage treatment, and treatment failure.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Optimal control and cost-effectiveness analysis of PfSPZ vaccination and indoor residual spraying in malaria transmission: a case study in Keerom.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A co-infection model between HIV and COVID-19 that takes into account COVID-19 vaccination and public awareness is discussed in this article. Rigorous analysis of the model is conducted to establish the existence and local stability conditions of the single-infection models. We discover that when the corresponding reproduction number for COVID-19 and HIV exceeds one, the disease continues to exist in both single-infection models. Furthermore, HIV will always be eradicated if its reproduction number is less than one. Nevertheless, this does not apply to the single-infection COVID-19 model. Even when the fundamental reproduction number is less than one, an endemic equilibrium point may exist due to the potential for a backward bifurcation phenomenon. Consequently, in the single-infection COVID-19 model, bistability between the endemic and disease-free equilibrium may arise when the basic reproduction number is less than one. From the co-infection model, we find that the reproduction number of the co-infection model is the maximum value between the reproduction number of HIV and COVID-19. Our numerical continuation experiments on the co-infection model reveal a threshold indicating that both HIV and COVID-19 may coexist within the population. The disease-free equilibrium for both HIV and COVID-19 is stable only if the reproduction numbers are less than one. Additionally, our two-parameter continuation analysis of the bifurcation diagram shows that the condition where both reproduction numbers equal one serves as an organizing center for the dynamic behavior of the co-infection model. An extended version of our model incorporates four different interventions: face mask usage, vaccination, and public awareness for COVID-19, as well as condom use for HIV, formulated as an optimal control problem. The Pontryagin's Maximum Principle is employed to characterize the optimal control problem, which is solved using a forward-backward iterative method. Numerical investigations of the optimal control model highlight the critical role of a well-designed combination of interventions to achieve optimal reductions in the spread of both HIV and COVID-19.
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.