OBJECTIVE: Estimate the magnitude of the association between population mobility, measured by net migration rate (NMR), and HIV prevalence in Central America and Mexico. METHODS: Using time series models, based on public information from UNAIDS, UNDP, ECLAC, and the World Bank for the period 1990-2009, this association was studied in individuals aged 15-49 years, and adjusted for socioeconomic factors (education, unemployment, life expectancy, and income). RESULTS: NMR was negative in all countries except Costa Rica and Panama. Unadjusted results of the model show a positive association and that NMR can explain 6% of recorded HIV prevalence. When socioeconomic cofactors are included by country (education, health, and income), the magnitude increases to 9% (P<0.05). NMR, even when adjusted for socioeconomic factors, explains some of recorded HIV prevalence. All socioeconomic indicators show improvements in Central America and Mexico, although large gaps persist among countries. CONCLUSIONS: The modest association observed between population mobility and HIV prevalence is conditioned by the socioeconomic status of the countries studied. Information availability limited the study's ability to establish the existence of this association with greater certainty. Accordingly, based on available information, it is not possible to affirm that migration plays a key role in the spread of HIV.
OBJECTIVE: Estimate the magnitude of the association between population mobility, measured by net migration rate (NMR), and HIV prevalence in Central America and Mexico. METHODS: Using time series models, based on public information from UNAIDS, UNDP, ECLAC, and the World Bank for the period 1990-2009, this association was studied in individuals aged 15-49 years, and adjusted for socioeconomic factors (education, unemployment, life expectancy, and income). RESULTS: NMR was negative in all countries except Costa Rica and Panama. Unadjusted results of the model show a positive association and that NMR can explain 6% of recorded HIV prevalence. When socioeconomic cofactors are included by country (education, health, and income), the magnitude increases to 9% (P<0.05). NMR, even when adjusted for socioeconomic factors, explains some of recorded HIV prevalence. All socioeconomic indicators show improvements in Central America and Mexico, although large gaps persist among countries. CONCLUSIONS: The modest association observed between population mobility and HIV prevalence is conditioned by the socioeconomic status of the countries studied. Information availability limited the study's ability to establish the existence of this association with greater certainty. Accordingly, based on available information, it is not possible to affirm that migration plays a key role in the spread of HIV.