Circs.org Comment
Van Howe's meta-analysis has been criticised for inappropriate and unsound methodology.[1,2] When the analysis is performed correctly, the opposite results are found.[1,2] A later systematic review concluded that there strong epidemiological evidence of a protective effect of circumcision, but recommended waiting for the results of randomised controlled trials.[3] The results of the first randomised controlled trial found that circumcision is equivalent to a vaccine with 63% efficacy.[4]
- O'Farrell N, Egger M. Circumcision in men and the prevention of HIV infection: a 'meta-analysis' revisited. Int J STD AIDS 2000 Mar; 11(3): 137-42
- Moses S, Nagelkerke NJ, Blanchard J. Analysis of the scientific literature on male circumcision and risk for HIV infection. Int J STD AIDS. 1999 Sep;10(9):626-8
- Siegfried N, Muller M, Volmink J, Egger M, Low N, Weiss H, Walker S, Deeks J, Williamson P. Male circumcision for prevention of heterosexual acquisition of HIV in men. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2003.
- Auvert B, Puren A, Taljaard D, Lagarde E, Sitta R, Tambekou J. Impact of male circumcision on the female-to-male transmission of HIV. Paper presented at the 3rd IAS Conference on HIV Pathogenesis and Treatment, Rio de Janeiro, 24-27 July, 2005.

