Evaluating the sensitivity of jurisdictional heterogeneity and jurisdictional mixing in national level HIV prevention analyses: context of the U.S. ending the HIV epidemic plan

Table 5 Change in jurisdiction-specific incidence^a (min, max^b) in mixing scenarios compared to no-mixing (2018^e, with jurisdictional heterogeneity^c)

*Scenario no. ➔*		S9^d (or S13)^e	S10^d (or S14)^e	S11^d (or S15)^e	S12^d (or S16)^e
*Mixing assumption ➔*		No-mixing	Mixing level 1 (min, max) ^b	Mixing level 2 (min, max) ^b	Mixing level 3 (min, max) ^b
*Risk group*	*Jurisdiction type*	No-mixing	Mixing level 1 (min, max) ^b	Mixing level 2 (min, max) ^b	Mixing level 3 (min, max) ^b
All	National	Ref	− 8, 30%	−31, 109%	−27, 94%
	EHE	Ref	− 8, 11%	− 31, 39%	− 27, 46%
	Non-EHE	Ref	−5, 30%	−18, 109%	− 11, 94%
HM	National	Ref	−9, 63%	− 37, 269%	− 31, 221%
	EHE	Ref	− 9, 13%	− 37, 56%	− 31, 43%
	Non-EHE	Ref	0, 63%	0, 269%	8, 221%
HF	National	Ref	− 8, 36%	− 27, 125%	− 23, 99%
	EHE	Ref	−8, 9%	− 27, 31%	− 23, 25%
	Non-EHE	Ref	−4, 36%	− 14, 125%	− 11, 99%
MSM	National	Ref	− 9, 24%	− 31, 84%	− 34, 71%
	EHE	Ref	−9, 12%	− 31, 44%	− 34, 52%
	Non-EHE	Ref	−6, 24%	−22, 84%	−17, 71%

HM Heterosexual males, HF Heterosexual females, MSM Men who have sex with men
National: aggregate of all EHE and non-EHE jurisdictions; EHE: aggregate of all EHE jurisdictions; Non-EHE: aggregate of all non-EHE jurisdictions;
^a Jurisdiction-specific % change in incidence in mixing compared to no-mixing scenario = 100 × (mixing scenario – no-mixing scenario)/mixing scenario)
^b Values presented are the range (minimum, maximum) across jurisdictions for year 2018
^c Scenarios S9 to S12 and Scenarios S13 to S16 assume jurisdictional heterogeneity
^d Scenarios S9 to S12 (baseline intervention) and ^e Scenarios S13 to S16 (EHE plan intervention) start at same baseline using 2018 care metrics (HIV-diagnosis rate, care-drop-out rate, and PrEP coverage)

ISSN: 1471-2288