| Title |
Evaluating HIV prevention strategies for populations in key affected groups: the example of Cabo Verde
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Public Health, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00038-015-0676-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
João Filipe G. Monteiro, Sandro Galea, Timothy Flanigan, Maria de Lourdes Monteiro, Samuel R. Friedman, Brandon D. L. Marshall |
| Abstract |
We used an individual-based model to evaluate the effects of hypothetical prevention interventions on HIV incidence trajectories in a concentrated, mixed epidemic setting from 2011 to 2021, and using Cabo Verde as an example. Simulations were conducted to evaluate the extent to which early HIV treatment and optimization of care, HIV testing, condom distribution, and substance abuse treatment could eliminate new infections (i.e., reduce incidence to less than 10 cases per 10,000 person-years) among non-drug users, female sex workers (FSW), and people who use drugs (PWUD). Scaling up all four interventions resulted in the largest decreases in HIV, with estimates ranging from 1.4 (95 % CI 1.36-1.44) per 10,000 person-years among non-drug users to 8.2 (95 % CI 7.8-8.6) per 10,000 person-years among PWUD in 2021. Intervention scenarios prioritizing FWS and PWUD also resulted in HIV incidence estimates at or below 10 per 10,000 person-years by 2021 for all population sub-groups. Our results suggest that scaling up multiple interventions among entire population is necessary to achieve elimination. However, prioritizing key populations with this combination prevention strategy may also result in a substantial decrease in total incidence. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Chile | 1 | 20% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 119 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 22 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 13% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 13% |
| Unknown | 34 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 16 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Psychology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 11% |
| Unknown | 45 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 49. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 April 2015.
All research outputs
#847,850
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Public Health
#74
of 1,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,559
of 279,374 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Public Health
#3
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 279,374 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.