Back

Real-World Validation of Machine Learning Models for HIV Treatment Adherence Prediction and Care Gap Quantification: A Multi-Country Analysis of 192,732 Clinical Records

Chinthala, L. K.

2026-05-19 hiv aids
10.64898/2026.05.15.26353325 medRxiv
Show abstract

Delayed diagnosis and poor antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence remain primary drivers of HIV-related morbidity in low-resource settings, yet real-world AI validation at scale is lacking. We conducted a retrospective validation study using two publicly available, de-identified datasets: a Quality of Care cohort of 27,288 HIV-positive patients on ART across multiple healthcare facilities, and the CEPHIA multi-country assay database comprising 165,444 specimen records from six countries. Four machine learning classifiers were evaluated using 10-fold stratified cross-validation with SMOTE applied strictly to training folds. Explicit data leakage prevention, ablation analysis, calibration assessment, and bootstrap confidence intervals were applied. Economic projections used one-way sensitivity analysis. This study adheres to TRIPOD reporting guidelines. Random Forest achieved AUC-ROC of 0.9753 (95% CI: 0.970-0.975), sensitivity 87.3% (95% CI: 86.4-88.2%), specificity 95.7% (95% CI: 95.2-96.2%), and Brier score 0.079. Ablation testing confirmed robustness (AUC 0.963 without the primary predictor). Temporal validation on held-out future patients yielded AUC 0.772 (95% CI: 0.744-0.802), confirming generalisation across time. Real-world analysis revealed median diagnosis-to-ART delay of 74 days, with 47.3% of patients exceeding 90 days and 36.7% presenting with CD4 below 200 cells per microlitre. Multi-country CEPHIA analysis identified 18.6% HIV recency within the 130-day early-intervention window. Decision curve analysis confirmed net clinical benefit across threshold probabilities 0.03-0.45. Subgroup analysis demonstrated consistent AUC across sex, age, CD4 strata, and WHO staging (max difference 0.051). Economic modelling projected base-case savings of USD 415 per patient (USD 2.07 million per 5,000-patient cohort). These findings provide large-scale empirical evidence that AI-driven informatics can predict ART adherence failure and quantify systemic care gaps, offering a scalable framework for equitable HIV care delivery in resource-limited settings. Prospective external validation is required before clinical deployment.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.1%
2
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 15%
12.1%
3
Nature Human Behaviour
85 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
9.8%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 25%
6.6%
5
AIDS
31 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.2%
50% of probability mass above
6
JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.2%
7
Journal of the International AIDS Society
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.9%
8
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 10%
3.5%
9
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.5%
10
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
11
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 37%
2.0%
12
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.6%
13
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.6%
14
Epidemics
104 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.6%
15
International Journal of Medical Informatics
25 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.4%
16
American Journal of Epidemiology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.4%
17
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
18
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
19
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
20
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.1%
21
AIDS and Behavior
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
22
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
23
The Lancet Global Health
24 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
24
Nature Genetics
240 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
25
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
26
Science Translational Medicine
111 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.6%