Evidence Hub

Five-year risk of HIV diagnosis subsequent to 147 hospital-based indicator diseases: a Danish nationwide population-based cohort study

L. Omland, Rebecca Legarth, M. Ahlström, H. Sørensen, N. Obel

Clinical Epidemiology, 2016

12 citations

Abstract

Background It has been suggested that targeted human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing programs are cost-effective in populations with an HIV prevalence >0.1%. Several indicator diseases are known to be associated with increased risk of HIV infection, but estimates of HIV frequency in persons with relevant indicator diseases are nonexistent. Methods In a nationwide population-based cohort study encompassing all Danish residents aged 20–60 years during 1994–2013, we estimated the 5-year risk of an HIV diagnosis (FYRHD) after a first-time diagnosis of 147 prespecified potential indicator diseases. To estimate the risk of HIV diagnosis in the general population without any indicator diseases, we calculated the FYRHD starting at age 25, 35, 45, and 55 years. Results The risk in the male general population was substantially higher than the female general population, and the risk was lower in the older age categories. Individuals of African origin had a higher FYRHD than individuals of Danish origin. A number of diseases were identified with a FYRHD >0.1%, with infectious diseases, such as syphilis, hepatitis, and endocarditis, associated with a particularly high FYRHD. Other potential indicator diseases, such as most urologic, nephrologic, rheumatologic, and endocrine disorders were generally associated with a low FYRHD. Conclusion Our study identified a large number of indicator diseases associated with a FYRHD >0.1%. These data can be used as a tool for planning targeted HIV…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free