Dataset Information

Using interviewer random effects to remove selection bias from HIV prevalence estimates.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Selection bias in HIV prevalence estimates occurs if non-participation in testing is correlated with HIV status. Longitudinal data suggests that individuals who know or suspect they are HIV positive are less likely to participate in testing in HIV surveys, in which case methods to correct for missing data which are based on imputation and observed characteristics will produce biased results.

Methods

The identity of the HIV survey interviewer is typically associated with HIV testing participation, but is unlikely to be correlated with HIV status. Interviewer identity can thus be used as a selection variable allowing estimation of Heckman-type selection models. These models produce asymptotically unbiased HIV prevalence estimates, even when non-participation is correlated with unobserved characteristics, such as knowledge of HIV status. We introduce a new random effects method to these selection models which overcomes non-convergence caused by collinearity, small sample bias, and incorrect inference in existing approaches. Our method is easy to implement in standard statistical software, and allows the construction of bootstrapped standard errors which adjust for the fact that the relationship between testing and HIV status is uncertain and needs to be estimated.

Results

Using nationally representative data from the Demographic and Health Surveys, we illustrate our approach with new point estimates and confidence intervals (CI) for HIV prevalence among men in Ghana (2003) and Zambia (2007). In Ghana, we find little evidence of selection bias as our selection model gives an HIV prevalence estimate of 1.4% (95% CI 1.2% - 1.6%), compared to 1.6% among those with a valid HIV test. In Zambia, our selection model gives an HIV prevalence estimate of 16.3% (95% CI 11.0% - 18.4%), compared to 12.1% among those with a valid HIV test. Therefore, those who decline to test in Zambia are found to be more likely to be HIV positive.

Conclusions

Our approach corrects for selection bias in HIV prevalence estimates, is possible to implement even when HIV prevalence or non-participation is very high or very low, and provides a practical solution to account for both sampling and parameter uncertainty in the estimation of confidence intervals. The wide confidence intervals estimated in an example with high HIV prevalence indicate that it is difficult to correct statistically for the bias that may occur when a large proportion of people refuse to test.

SUBMITTER: McGovern ME

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4429465 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Using interviewer random effects to remove selection bias from HIV prevalence estimates.

McGovern Mark E ME Bärnighausen Till T Salomon Joshua A JA Canning David D

BMC medical research methodology 20150205

<h4>Background</h4>Selection bias in HIV prevalence estimates occurs if non-participation in testing is correlated with HIV status. Longitudinal data suggests that individuals who know or suspect they are HIV positive are less likely to participate in testing in HIV surveys, in which case methods to correct for missing data which are based on imputation and observed characteristics will produce biased results.<h4>Methods</h4>The identity of the HIV survey interviewer is typically associated with ...[more]

PMID: 25656226

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan, China, has been estimated using imported case counts of international travellers, generally under the assumptions that all cases of the disease in travellers have been ascertained and that infection prevalence in travellers and residents is the same. However, findings indicate variation among locations in the capacity for detection of imported cases. Singapore has had very strong epidemiological surveillance and contact tracing capacity during previous infectious disease outbreaks and has consistently shown high sensitivity of case-detection during the COVID-19 outbreak.MethodsWe used a Bayesian modelling approach to estimate the relative capacity for detection of imported cases of COVID-19 for 194 locations (excluding China) compared with that for Singapore. We also built a simple mathematical model of the point prevalence of infection in visitors to an epicentre relative to that in residents.FindingsThe weighted global ability to detect Wuhan-to-location imported cases of COVID-19 was estimated to be 38% (95% highest posterior density interval [HPDI] 22-64) of Singapore's capacity. This value is equivalent to 2·8 (95% HPDI 1·5-4·4) times the current number of imported and reported cases that could have been detected if all locations had had the same detection capacity as Singapore. Using the second component of the Global Health Security index to stratify likely case-detection capacities, the ability to detect imported cases relative to Singapore was 40% (95% HPDI 22-67) among locations with high surveillance capacity, 37% (18-68) among locations with medium surveillance capacity, and 11% (0-42) among locations with low surveillance capacity. Treating all travellers as if they were residents (rather than accounting for the brief stay of some of these travellers in Wuhan) contributed modestly to underestimation of prevalence.InterpretationEstimates of case counts in Wuhan based on assumptions of 100% detection in travellers could have been underestimated by several fold. Furthermore, severity estimates will be inflated several fold since they also rely on case count estimates. Finally, our model supports evidence that underdetected cases of COVID-19 have probably spread in most locations around the world, with greatest risk in locations of low detection capacity and high connectivity to the epicentre of the outbreak.FundingUS National Institute of General Medical Sciences, and Fellowship Foundation Ramon Areces.

Project description:ObjectiveAlthough geographically specific data can help target HIV prevention and treatment strategies, Nigeria relies on national- and state-level estimates for policymaking and intervention planning. We calculated sub-state estimates along the HIV continuum of care in Nigeria.DesignUsing data from the Nigeria HIV/AIDS Indicator and Impact Survey (NAIIS) (July-December 2018), we conducted a geospatial analysis estimating three key programmatic indicators: prevalence of HIV infection among adults (aged 15-64 years); antiretroviral therapy (ART) coverage among adults living with HIV; and viral load suppression (VLS) rate among adults living with HIV.MethodsWe used an ensemble modeling method called stacked generalization to analyze available covariates and a geostatistical model to incorporate the output from stacking as well as spatial autocorrelation in the modeled outcomes. Separate models were fitted for each indicator. Finally, we produced raster estimates of each indicator on an approximately 5×5-km grid and estimates at the sub-state/local government area (LGA) and state level.ResultsEstimates for all three indicators varied both within and between states. While state-level HIV prevalence ranged from 0.3% (95% uncertainty interval [UI]: 0.3%-0.5%]) to 4.3% (95% UI: 3.7%-4.9%), LGA prevalence ranged from 0.2% (95% UI: 0.1%-0.5%) to 8.5% (95% UI: 5.8%-12.2%). Although the range in ART coverage did not substantially differ at state level (25.6%-76.9%) and LGA level (21.9%-81.9%), the mean absolute difference in ART coverage between LGAs within states was 16.7 percentage points (range, 3.5-38.5 percentage points). States with large differences in ART coverage between LGAs also showed large differences in VLS-regardless of level of effective treatment coverage-indicating that state-level geographic targeting may be insufficient to address coverage gaps.ConclusionGeospatial analysis across the HIV continuum of care can effectively highlight sub-state variation and identify areas that require further attention in order to achieve epidemic control. By generating local estimates, governments, donors, and other implementing partners will be better positioned to conduct targeted interventions and prioritize resource distribution.

Dataset Information

Using interviewer random effects to remove selection bias from HIV prevalence estimates.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Using interviewer random effects to remove selection bias from HIV prevalence estimates.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets