Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35407428›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

A Machine-Learning-Based Risk-Prediction Tool for HIV and Sexually Transmitted Infections Acquisition over the Next 12 Months.

Xianglong Xu, Zongyuan Ge, Eric P F Chow, Zhen Yu, David Lee, Jinrong Wu, Jason J Ong, Christopher K Fairley, Lei Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

Xianglong XuMelbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC 3053, Australia.
Zongyuan GeMonash e-Research Centre, Faculty of Engineering, Airdoc Research, Nvidia AI Technology Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3800, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5880-8673
Eric P F ChowMelbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC 3053, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1766-0657
Zhen YuCentral Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3800, Australia.
David LeeMelbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC 3053, Australia.
Jinrong WuResearch Centre for Data Analytics and Cognition, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC 3086, Australia.
Jason J OngMelbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC 3053, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5784-7403
Christopher K FairleyMelbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC 3053, Australia.
Lei ZhangMelbourne Sexual Health Centre, Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC 3053, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2343-084X

Funding

Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Emerging Leadership Investigator Grant GNT1172873Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Emerging Leadership Investigator Grant GNT1193955Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Leadership Investigator Grant GNT1172900National Natural Science Foundation of China 8191101420Thousand Talents Plan Professorship for Young Scholars 3111500001Xi'an Jiaotong University Basic Research and Profession Grant xtr022019003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMore than one million people acquire sexually transmitted infections (STIs) every day globally. It is possible that predicting an individual's future risk of HIV/STIs could contribute to behaviour change or improve testing. We developed a series of machine learning models and a subsequent risk-prediction tool for predicting the risk of HIV/STIs over the next 12 months.

methodsOur data included individuals who were re-tested at the clinic for HIV (65,043 consultations), syphilis (56,889 consultations), gonorrhoea (60,598 consultations), and chlamydia (63,529 consultations) after initial consultations at the largest public sexual health centre in Melbourne from 2 March 2015 to 31 December 2019. We used the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curve to evaluate the model's performance. The HIV/STI risk-prediction tool was delivered via a web application.

resultsOur risk-prediction tool had an acceptable performance on the testing datasets for predicting HIV (AUC = 0.72), syphilis (AUC = 0.75), gonorrhoea (AUC = 0.73), and chlamydia (AUC = 0.67) acquisition.

conclusionsUsing machine learning techniques, our risk-prediction tool has acceptable reliability in predicting HIV/STI acquisition over the next 12 months. This tool may be used on clinic websites or digital health platforms to form part of an intervention tool to increase testing or reduce future HIV/STI risk.

Indexed as

behavioural interventionHIVmachine learningrisk predictionsexually transmitted infections

Identifiers

PMID35407428
PMCPMC8999359

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.