ArticleClinical epidemiology and global health
Underrepresentation of Africa in HIV cure research: A systematic review of the literature from 2010 to 2022.
Article in Clinical epidemiology and global health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Problem considered: Over the past decade, there has been a significant increase in research aimed at finding a cure or achieving long-term remission for HIV. However, the extent to which this research includes Africa-the continent with the highest HIV burden-remains unclear. To address this, we conducted a systematic review of the literature to assess Africa's contributions to HIV cure research. Methods: We reviewed original HIV cure-related research published from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2022, in Embase.com and Web of Science. Our search terms, 'HIV cure(s)' and 'research,' along with their synonyms like HIV latency, persistence, and reactivation, covered all languages and geographic locations. The study adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: Of 1077 studies reviewed, 614 (57 %) were performed in North America, followed by Europe (24.3 %), Asia (17.2 %), and Australia 5.2 %). Africa contributed only 31 studies (2.9 %). Of the 31 African studies, Southern Africa accounted for 67.7 %, followed by Eastern Africa (19.4 %) and Western Africa (12.9 %). No cure-related studies were performed in Northern and Central African institutions. African contributions across the different types of studies were 18 (3.7 %) for ex vivo, 8 (10.7 %) for social science and epidemiological, 3 (3.3 %) for clinical trials, 4 (0.8 %) for basic science, and zero for animal studies. The NIH funded the majority of all cure-related studies. Conclusions: This systematic review shows that African patients and scientists are contributing little to HIV cure research, and urgent measures are needed to remedy the disparity.
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.