National Health Statistics Reports
 

Number 83  September 24, 2015 

HIV Infection in U.S. Household Population 


Aged 18–59: Data From the National Health and 


Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007–2012
 

by Joseph Woodring, D.O., M.P.H., M.T.M.H.; Deanna Kruszon-Moran, M.S.; and 

Geraldine McQuillan, Ph.D., Division of Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys 

Abstract 

Objectives—This report presents estimates of HIV prevalence, the association 

of HIV status with key risk factors, and the prevalence of antiretroviral drug use 

among HIV-infected adults, based on the 2007–2012 National Health and Nutrition 

Examination Survey (NHANES). 

Methods—HIV prevalence was estimated based on 10,466 NHANES respondents 

aged 18–59 during 2007–2012. Starting in 2009, the NHANES age range for HIV 

antibody testing was expanded from age group 18–49 to age group 18–59. HIV 

prevalence for 2007–2012 was estimated using 6 years of data and corresponding 

weights for participants aged 18–49 from NHANES 2007–2012, and 4 years of data 

and corresponding weights for participants aged 50–59 from NHANES 2009–2012. 

This HIV prevalence calculation assumes that HIV prevalence, and the relationship 

between prevalence and levels of all relevant cofactors, were the same between survey 

periods 2007–2008 and 2009–2012 for adults aged 50–59. HIV antibody status was 

measured using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to detect antibody to 

HIV, followed by confirmatory Western blot for those with a positive ELISA test. 

Results—During 2007–2012, the overall HIV prevalence among adults aged 

18–59 residing in U.S. households was 0.39%. Men were more likely to be HIVinfected than women, and non-Hispanic black persons were more likely to be HIVinfected than all other race and Hispanic origin subgroups combined. HIV infection 

was associated with high-risk populations, including those with herpes simplex 

virus type 2 infection, 10 or more lifetime sexual partners, a history of prior sexually 

transmitted infection, or a history of same-sex sexual contact among men. One-half 

of HIV-infected adults were on antiretroviral therapy (51.9%). Among HIV-infected 

adults, 86.1% reported any lifetime history of HIV testing outside of blood donations. 

Keywords: HIV testing • risk factors • population surveillance • health care disparities 

Introduction 

In the United States, 1.2 million 

people are living with HIV, and an 

estimated 50,000 people become infected 

with HIV each year (1). Approximately 

one of every five HIV-infected persons is 

undiagnosed (2), and persons unaware of 

their HIV status are estimated to transmit 

more than one-half of all infections 

(1,3,4). To help attain a national goal 

of having 90% of HIV-positive people 

become aware of their status by 2020 

(5), delivering cost-effective, evidencebased, and scalable programs to at-risk 

populations has been shown to increase 

awareness of HIV status and reduce HIV 

transmission (6–9). Monitoring national 

trends of HIV prevalence and HIV 

risk factors remain important national 

health surveillance activities to better 

understand the health behaviors and 

characteristics influencing these trends. 

The National Health and Nutrition 

Examination Survey (NHANES) is 

a cross-sectional survey designed 

to provide national statistics on the 

health and nutritional status of the 

noninstitutionalized civilian U.S. 

population through household interviews 

and standardized physical examinations, 

including the collection of biologic 

samples in mobile examination 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
 

National Center for Health Statistics
 
Page 2 National Health Statistics Reports  Number 83  September 24, 2015 

centers (MECs). Starting in 1999, the 

survey became continuous, collecting 

demographic, socioeconomic, 

dietary, and health-related data from 

approximately 5,000 U.S. participants 

each year (10). Based on NHANES 

1999–2006, the prevalence of HIV 

infection among adults aged 18–49 

residing in U.S. civilian households was 

0.47% (11). This report provides HIV 

prevalence estimates from NHANES 

2007–2012, describes the association 

of HIV status with key risk factors, and 

examines the prevalence of antiretroviral 

(ARV) drug use among HIV-infected 

adults. 

Methods 

Sample design 

The NHANES sample is selected 

through a complex, multistage probability 

cluster design representative of all 

ages of the U.S. household population. 

Certain subgroups are sampled at 

higher frequencies than other subgroups 

to obtain more reliable estimates. In 

NHANES 2007–2012, non-Hispanic 

black, Mexican American, and all 

Hispanic persons were targeted for 

oversampling. Starting in 2011, Asian 

persons were also oversampled. Data 

files are released every 2 years and can 

be combined to produce more statistically 

reliable estimates. All participants 

provided informed consent, and the 

NHANES protocol was approved by 

the Research Ethics Review Board of 

the Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention’s (CDC) National Center for 

Health Statistics (NCHS). More detailed 

information on NHANES is available 

elsewhere (10,12,13). 

Measures 

In 2005, CDC estimated that 15% 

of new HIV infections were acquired 

by adults aged 50 and over (14). By 

2015, one-half of all persons living with 

HIV in the United States will be aged 

50 and over (15). During 2007–2008, 

HIV antibody status was measured 

from the serum of examined sample 

persons aged 18–49. Starting in 2009, 

the age range for HIV antibody testing 

was expanded to include ages 50–59. 

NHANES participants aged 50–59 were 

the only age group from 2003–2006 to 

2007–2010 to show a significant increase 

in the percentage having ever been tested 

for HIV (16). The expansion of the age 

range to include ages 50–59 was done to 

accommodate the aging demographics 

of HIV postroutine use of antiretroviral 

combination treatment. This expansion 

was also done to accommodate numerous 

requests for HIV test results from 

NHANES participants over the age of 

50 who called to receive their sexually 

transmitted infection (STI) results. All 

participants provided consent for HIV 

testing. Blood was drawn by trained 

phlebotomists in the MEC and tested 

using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent 

assay (ELISA) to detect antibody to 

HIV, followed by confirmatory Western 

blot for those with positive ELISA tests. 

Herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV–2) 

status was measured in examined sample 

persons aged 18–49 from NHANES 

2007–2012. Blood was tested by typespecific immunodot assays to detect 

anti-HSV–2 antibodies (17). 

Sensitive questions involving 

sexual behavior, drug use, STIs, and 

HIV testing status were collected in 

the MEC using the audio computerassisted self-interviewing (ACASI) and 

computer-assisted personal interviewing 

(CAPI) systems, which allow respondents 

to privately listen to and respond to 

questions delivered through a touchscreen computer. Studies have shown 

ACASI to yield more complete reporting 

of sensitive behaviors compared to selfadministered, paper-based questionnaires 

(18,19). For lifetime history of HIV 

testing status, respondents aged 18 and 

over were asked, “Except for tests you 

may have had as part of blood donations, 

have you ever had blood tested for the 

AIDS virus infection?” Drug use was 

classified as any drug use compared with 

none, based on a self-reported response 

to specific questions on cocaine or other 

street-drug use as well as injection-drug 

use during a lifetime. More specifically, 

respondents aged 18 and over were 

asked: “Have you ever, even once, used 

cocaine, in any form?”; “Have you ever, 

even once, used methamphetamine?”; 

“Have you ever, even once, used 

heroin?”; “Have you ever, even once, 

used a needle to inject a drug not 

prescribed by a doctor?”; and “Which of 

the following drugs have you injected 

using a needle?” Insufficient sample 

size of injection-drug users resulted in 

the merging of injection and illicit drug 

use categories, with only one participant 

reporting injection drug use who denied 

any illicit drug use. Sexual activity data 

included lifetime number of sexual 

partners (LSP) and history of men who 

have had sex with men. 

Additional variables that were 

collected during the household interviews 

included: age; sex; poverty index ratio 

(calculated by dividing family income by 

a poverty threshold specific for family 

size, using the U.S. Department of Health 

and Human Services’ poverty guidelines 

and categorized as either below poverty 

[less than 1] or at or above poverty [1 or 

more]) (20); education (self-categorized 

as having less than high school education, 

having completed high school or General 

Educational Development [GED] high 

school equivalency diploma, or having 

more than a high school education); 

receipt of any health care in the past 

12 months; and any current health 

insurance. Race and Hispanic origin 

were based on the respondents’ selfreported information and categorized as 

non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, 

and Mexican American. Respondents 

who did not self-identify among these 

three groups were classified as “other,” 

which included all non-MexicanAmerican Hispanic persons and persons 

reporting multiple races. Estimates for 

the “other” category were not reported 

separately; however, these respondents 

were included when calculating estimates 

for the total population. Use of ARV 

drugs was determined from the Dietary 

and Prescription Medication Section of 

the Sample Person Questionnaire. The 

prescription medication questionnaire 

was administered, in the home, by trained 

interviewers using the CAPI system. 

Survey participants were asked if they 

had taken a prescription medication in the 

past 30 days. Those who answered “yes” 

were asked to show the interviewer the 

medication containers of all prescription 

medications. For each drug reported, 

the interviewer recorded the product’s 

complete name from the container (6). 

See Technical Notes for a list of the 
National Health Statistics Reports  Number 83  September 24, 2015 Page 3 

classes of ARV medication identified and 

included in the analysis. 

Respondents were also asked if 

a provider had told them they had 

gonorrhea or chlamydia in the past 12 

months and whether they were ever 

diagnosed with genital herpes or genital 

warts. Small sample sizes for each selfreported STI resulted in dichotomous 

coding of either reporting a history of one 

or more STIs or none of these STIs. 

A variable designating whether 

the individual was a member of any 

of the higher-risk groups was created. 

All persons who reported 10 or more 

lifetime number of sexual partners, were 

positive for HSV–2 (measured only 

for ages 18–49), reported ever having 

same-sex sexual contact (among men 

only), reported a history of an STI, or 

reported ever using injection or illicit 

drugs were designated as a member of 

that higher-risk group. Given that HSV–2 

was limited to testing among those aged 

18–49, this higher-risk variable was also 

limited to respondents aged 18–49. 

Sample weighting 

Examination sample weights, 

which account for the differential 

probabilities of selection, nonresponse, 

and noncoverage, are incorporated into 

the estimation process. Data from the 

three survey cycles (2007–2008, 2009– 

2010, and 2011–2012) were combined 

to create more stable estimates. As 

described earlier, the age range for HIV 

antibody testing was expanded in 2009 

to include ages 50–59. As a result, HIV 

serologic testing data was available for 

persons aged 18–59 during 2009–2012, 

but only for persons aged 18–49 during 

2007–2008. Because HIV prevalence 

is very low, with a corresponding small 

number of HIV-infected adults, the 

analysis seeks to use the full age range 

and the full 6 years of data. Restricting 

the sample to 2009–2012 would result in 

losing 23% of HIV-infected participants 

(12 out of 52) and 27% of the analysis 

sample. Similarly, 23% of HIV-infected 

participants (12 out of 52) and 33% of 

the analysis sample would be lost if 

those aged 50–59 were not included in 

the analyses. The distribution of the final 

sample by all demographic and high-risk 

variables is detailed in Table 1. 

A single estimate was created for 

those aged 18–49, based on 6 years of 

data (2007–2012) and the applicable 

6-year weights, by dividing the 2-year 

weights for each survey cycle by 3, as 

recommended in the analytic guidelines 

(13). For those aged 50–59, a single 

estimate for 2007–2012 was created, 

based on 4 years of data (2009–2012) and 

the applicable 4-year weights, by dividing 

the 2-year weights by 2, as recommended 

in the analytic guidelines. Using only the 

4 years of data from 2009–2012 instead 

of 2007–2012 to calculate estimates for 

2007–2012 required that the prevalence 

of HIV during 2007–2008 did not differ 

from the other 4 years (2009–2012), and 

that relationships between HIV and the 

cofactors analyzed also were not different 

during 2007–2008 compared with 

2009–2012. A sensitivity analysis was 

conducted to validate these assumptions. 

Sensitivity analysis 

The first step in assessing the 

aforementioned assumptions was to 

compare the distributions of all potential 

demographic and behavioral risk factors 

for HIV positivity between those aged 

50–59 in 2007–2008 without HIV 

serology and those aged 50–59 in 2009– 

2012 who had HIV serologic results, 

to determine whether the distributions 

of these factors were similar (Table 2). 

Compared with adults aged 50–59 from 

NHANES 2007–2008, those aged 50–59 

from 2009–2012 had a higher percentage 

of ever using injection or illicit drugs 

(p < 0.05), a higher percentage with 10 

or more LSPs compared to 0–4 LSPs 

(p < 0.01), and a lower percentage with 

health insurance (p < 0.05) (Table 2). 

No differences were found between 

the two groups with respect to all other 

demographic or risk factor variables 

examined in the analyses. Because a 

difference was found between the two 

samples for only one significant predictor 

of HIV positivity in the analysis (10 

or more LSPs), the estimate of HIV 

prevalence for those aged 50–59 from 

NHANES 2007–2012 based on 2009– 

2012 data overall should be similar but 

may be somewhat greater than the true 

estimate for this age group over this time 

period. 

The results from the original analysis 

using 2007–2012 data with 4-year 

weights for sample persons aged 50–59 

and 6-year weights for ages 18–49 (Table 

3) were compared with the results from 

an analysis of only 4 years of data from 

2009–2012 for sample persons aged 18– 

59 (Table 4). Patterns and relationships 

were the same in both analyses. P values 

were less significant in some comparisons 

using the 2009–2012 data as expected, 

because the sample size was reduced by 

27%. 

Similarly, the original analysis 

presented in this report was compared 

with an analysis of those aged 18–49 

for 2007–2012 (data not shown). Again, 

patterns and differences were very similar 

to the original analysis, except that in 

the current analysis, no difference was 

found in the percentage of adults aged 

18–49 who either received or did not 

receive health care in the past 12 months. 

As a result of the similar patterns in all 

three analyses, results for ages 18–59 for 

NHANES 2007–2012 were presented 

based on analysis using the 4-year 

weights for participants aged 50–59 and 

6-year weights for those aged 18–49. 

Statistical methods 

Standard error estimates were 

calculated using Taylor series 

linearization in SUDAAN version 10.0 

(RTI International, Research Triangle 

Park, N.C.), a method that accounts for 

the complex sample design. Ninetyfive percent confidence intervals (95% 

CI) were computed using the ClopperPearson exact binomial method (21). 

The relative standard error (RSE), 

defined as the estimate divided into 

its standard error, is an indicator for 

statistical reliability. Estimates should 

be interpreted as statistically unreliable 

when the standard error of the estimate 

relative to the estimate itself (RSE) is 

greater than 40% or when the estimate 

is based on fewer than 10 HIVinfected sample persons. Because HIV 

prevalence is very low overall in the 

U.S. noninstitutionalized population, 

a more liberal cutoff to designate an 

unstable estimate of an RSE greater 

than 40% was used instead of the cutoff 

normally recommended in the analytic 

guidelines of RSE more than 30% (13). 
 

 

Page 4 National Health Statistics Reports  Number 83  September 24, 2015 

This criterion was used in previously 

published reports on HIV prevalence 

using NHANES data (11). The exact 

RSEs and the number of individuals in 

the numerator (i.e., those positive for the 

outcome) are provided in all tables to 

allow interpretation of the stability of all 

estimates. Because most HIV-infected 

adults (86.11%) had prior HIV testing, 

the RSE for those without prior HIV 

testing is reported in Table 5 for use in 

examining the instability of estimates for 

those with prior HIV testing. 

Differences in HIV prevalence 

between groups were tested using a 

Student’s t statistic from a linear contrast 

procedure in SUDAAN with a p value 

of less than 0.05 considered statistically 

significant. No corrections for multiple 

comparisons were made. Estimates 

for the prevalence of ARV use among 

HIV-infected adults (Table 5), and any 

lifetime history of HIV testing among 

HIV-infected adults (Table 6), were 

based on a total of 52 HIV-infected 

sample persons. The number of HIVinfected adults using ARV drugs, as well 

as the number of HIV-infected adults 

without any prior HIV testing, were both 

almost always very small (less than 10) 

with corresponding high RSEs (more 

than 40%) when examined by variable 

subgroups. The number of degrees of 

freedom in these subgroups was also very 

small, indicating that the standard error 

estimates are also unstable. Despite these 

limitations, estimates are presented to 

show the relative size of the differences 

found; however, due to instability of 

the estimates, statistical tests comparing 

subgroups for each of the cofactors 

reported were not performed. 

Response rates 

In NHANES 2007–2012, 73% 

of those sampled aged 20–59 were 

examined. Among those examined 

who were aged 18–59, 86% or 10,466 

persons had serologic testing for HIV. 

This equates to an approximate overall 

response rate of 63% of those sampled 

who had HIV serologic results. 

Results 

Table 1 provides sociodemographic 

characteristics and high-risk behaviors 

among U.S. adults aged 18–59. Thirtyfive percent of adults reported having 

10 or more sexual partners, 17.4% 

were positive for HSV–2 (ages 18–49), 

9.0% reported a history of an STI, and 

20.9% reported ever using injection or 

illicit drugs. Five percent of men aged 

18–59 reported having had a male sexual 

encounter. Overall, 52.8% of adults aged 

18–49 were in one or more of these highrisk behavior groups. 

HIV prevalence 

Overall, the HIV prevalence among 

adults residing in U.S. households aged 

18–59 from NHANES 2007–2012 was 

0.39% (95% CI: 0.22%–0.62%). HIV 

prevalence increased with age, from 

0.24% among those aged 18–39 to 

0.64% among those aged 50–59, but the 

increase with age was not statistically 

significant. Non-Hispanic black persons 

had a higher prevalence of HIV infection 

(1.6%) compared with all other race and 

Hispanic origin subgroups combined 

(0.23%) (p < 0.001). HIV infection was 

more than three times greater among 

men (0.61%) compared with women 

(0.16%) (p < 0.01). No difference was 

noted in HIV prevalence with respect to 

education, poverty index ratio, or current 

health insurance status. Participants who 

received health care in the past 12 months 

(0.45%) were more likely to be HIVinfected than those who did not receive 

health care in the past 12 months (0.13%) 

(p < 0.05) (Table 3). 

HIV prevalence increased with the 

number of LSPs: 0.14% for those with 

0–4 LSPs, 0.21% for those with 5–9 

LSPs, and 0.68% for those with 10 or 

more LSPs. HIV prevalence was higher 

among those with a self-reported STI 

history (1.8% compared with 0.23% 

without STI history) (p < 0.05), among 

males reporting ever having had samesex sexual contact (7.7% compared 

with 0.17% without such contact) 

(p < 0.01), and among ages 18–49 

positive for HSV–2 (1.2% compared 

with 0.11% negative for HSV–2) (p < 

0.01). Although HIV prevalence was 

higher among those reporting ever using 

injection or illicit drugs (0.79% compared 

with 0.24% denying ever using injection 

or illicit drugs), the difference between 

these subgroups did not reach statistical 

significance. HIV prevalence was higher 

among adults in one or more of the 

higher-risk groups (0.56%, ages 18–49 

only) compared with those lacking a 

history of being in any of the higher-risk 

groups (0.05%) (p < 0.001) (Table 3). 

ARV drug use among HIVinfected adults 

Approximately one-half of HIVinfected adults (51.9%, 95% CI: 32.5%– 

70.9%) used antiretroviral drugs in the 

past month. Estimates for this variable 

were based on a limited number of 

HIV-infected persons in each cell (3–52) 

with very small numbers of persons 

taking ARV drugs (0–20). The resulting 

estimates are highly unstable and have 

very wide 95% CIs. In addition, the 

estimate of the variance is also unstable 

due to the few degrees of freedom 

represented in each subgroup (0–7). ARV 

drug use appears to be higher among nonHispanic white (88.4%) compared with 

non-Hispanic black (30.7%) persons, 

and among men (61.5%) compared with 

women (16.7%); increased with age 

(22.9% for ages 18–39, 45.2% for ages 

40–49, and 80.1% for ages 50–59); and 

was greater among those with health 

insurance coverage (58.7%) compared 

with those lacking insurance coverage 

(16.2%). ARV drug use was also greater 

among subgroups associated with high 

risk for HIV infection—namely, those 

with 10 or more LSPs, men reporting 

ever having same-sex sexual contact, 

those reporting a history of an STI, 

those positive for HSV–2 (among ages 

18–49 only), and those reporting use 

of cocaine or other street drugs (Table 

5). The statistical significance of these 

differences is not presented due to the 

instability of the estimates and their 

variance. 

Lifetime history of HIV 

testing among HIV-infected 

adults 

Among HIV-infected adults, 86.1% 

(95% CI: 69.5%–95.7%) reported any 

lifetime history of HIV testing outside of 

blood donations compared with 43.5% 

(95% CI: 41.7%–45.3%) of HIV-negative 

adults. History of HIV testing among 
National Health Statistics Reports  Number 83  September 24, 2015	 Page 5 

HIV-infected adults appeared to be 

greater among men (94.1%) than women 

(61.0%); among those with 5–9 LSPs 

or 10 or more LSPs (more than 90% 

each) compared with those reporting 0–4 

LSPs (59.7%); among men reporting 

ever having had same-sex sexual contact 

(100%) compared with men denying ever 

having had such contact (79.1%); and 

among those reporting a history of an 

STI (100%) compared with those lacking 

an STI history (82.0%). Similar to the 

analysis of ARV use among HIV-infected 

adults mentioned above, these estimates 

were also highly unstable based on small 

sample sizes (range of 3–50), small cell 

sizes (0–7 persons not tested among 

some groups of HIV-infected adults), and 

limited number of degrees of freedom 

(0–6) (Table 6). Therefore, the statistical 

significance of these differences was not 

presented. 

Conclusion 

This report presents the most recent 

estimates on HIV prevalence in the 

United States, the association of HIV 

status with key risk factors, and the 

prevalence of ARV drug use among 

HIV-infected adults, based on ages 

18–59 in the U.S. household population. 

During 2007–2012, the prevalence 

of HIV infection among adults aged 

18–59 residing in U.S. households 

was 0.39%. A previous NHANES 

report showed HIV prevalence among 

adults aged 18–49 was 0.47% during 

1999–2006 (11). Limitations include 

possible bias resulting from those at the 

highest risk not being within the scope 

of the NHANES sample (i.e., outside 

of the civilian, noninstitutionalized 

household population—incarcerated, 

institutionalized, or homeless 

populations, among others), or those at 

the highest risk being more likely not 

to respond to the survey. In addition, 

reporting bias may exist with sexual risk 

behaviors and illicit drug use, which 

may have led to underreporting by 

certain subpopulations. Some potential 

underreporting may be ameliorated by 

NHANES’ use of ACASI and CAPI, 

which have been shown to elicit more 

comprehensive answers to potentially 

sensitive questions than paper-based 

questionnaires (18,19). 

Among those aged 18–49, no 

significant change was noted in HIV 

prevalence from 1999–2006 (0.47%, 95% 

CI: 0.33%–0.64%) to 2007–2012 (0.31%, 

95% CI: 0.19%–0.47%) (p > 0.05) 

(analysis not shown). During 2007– 

2012, HIV infection remained higher 

among men than women and among 

non-Hispanic black persons than other 

race and ethnicity groups combined. 

Additionally, a history of participating 

in any high-risk group, having received 

health care in the past 12 months, HSV–2 

infection, or a history of 10 or more 

LSPs, same-sex sexual contact among 

men, or a history of STI were associated 

with HIV infection. 

References 

1.	 CDC. Vital signs: HIV prevention through 

care and treatment—United States. 

MMWR 60(47):1618–23. 2011. 

2.	 CDC. Monitoring selected national HIV 

prevention and care objectives by using 

HIV surveillance data—United States 

and 6 U.S. dependent areas—2010. HIV 

Surveill Suppl Rep 17 (3 Pt A). 2012. 

Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/ 

hiv/library/reports/surveillance/2010/ 

surveillance_report_vol_17_no_3.html. 

3.	 Hall HI, Song R, Rhodes P, Prejean J, 

An Q, Lee LM, et al. Estimation of HIV 

incidence in the United States. JAMA. 

300(5):520–9. 2008. 

4.	 Marks G, Crepaz N, Janssen RS. 

Estimating sexual transmission of HIV 

from persons aware and unaware that they 

are infected with the virus in the USA. 

AIDS. 20(10):1447–50. 2006. 

5.	 U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services. Healthy People 2020: 2020 

topics and objectives. Available from: 

http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/ 

topicsobjectives2020/default.aspx. 

6.	 Walensky RP, Weinstein MC, Kimmel 

AD, Seage GR 3rd, Losina E, Sax PE, 

et al. Routine human immunodeficiency 

virus testing: An economic evaluation of 

current guidelines. Am J Med 118(3):292– 

300. 2005. 

7.	 Paltiel AD, Weinstein MC, Kimmel AD, 

Seage GR 3rd, Losina E, Zhang H, et al. 

Expanded screening for HIV in the United 

States—an analysis of cost-effectiveness. 

N Engl J Med; 352(6):586–95. 2005. 

8.	 Sanders GD, Bayoumi AM, Sundaram 

V, Bilir SP, Neukermans CP, Rydzak CE, 

et al. Cost-effectiveness of screening 

for HIV in the era of highly active 

antiretroviral therapy. N Engl J Med 

352(6):570–85. 2005. 

9.	 Paltiel AD, Walensky RP, Schackman 

BR, Seage GR 3rd, Mercincavage LM, 

Weinstein MC, et al. Expanded HIV 

screening in the United States: Effect on 

clinical outcomes, HIV transmission, and 

costs. Ann Intern Med 145(11):797–806. 

2006. 

10. Zipf G, Chiappa M, Porter KS, et 

al. National Health and Nutrition 

Examination Survey: Plan and operations, 

1999–2010. National Center for Health 

Statistics. Vital Health Stat 1(56). 2013. 

11. McQuillan G, Kruszon-Moran D. HIV 

infection in the United States household 

population aged 18–49 years: Results 

from 1999–2006. NCHS data brief, no 

4. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for 

Health Statistics. 2008. 

12. National Center for Health Statistics. 

About the National Health and Nutrition 

Examination Survey, NHANES file 

documentation. Available from: http:// 

www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/about_nhanes. 

htm. 

13. National Center for Health Statistics. 

National Health and Nutrition 

Examination Survey: Survey methods 

and analytical guidelines. Available from: 

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/survey_ 

methods.htm. 

14. CDC. HIV/AIDS surveillance report: 

Cases of HIV infection and AIDS in the 

United States and dependent areas, 2005. 

Vol 17:1–54, rev ed. Atlanta, GA. 2007. 

Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/ 

pdf/statistics_2005_hiv_surveillance_ 

report_vol_17.pdf. 

15. Kirk JB, Goetz MB. Human 

immunodeficiency virus in an aging 

population, a complication of success. 

J Am Geriatr Soc 57(11):2129–38. 2009. 

16. Woodring JV, Kruszon-Moran D, Oster 

AM, McQuillan GM. Did CDC’s 2006 

revised HIV testing recommendations 

make a difference? Evaluation of HIV 

testing in the US household population, 

2003–2010. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 

67(3):331–40. 2014. 

17. National Center for Health Statistics. 

National Health and Nutrition 

Examination Survey (NHANES) 

laboratory procedures manual. 2011. 

Hyattsville, MD. Available from: 

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/ 

nhanes_11_12/2011-12_Laboratory_ 

Procedures_Manual.pdf. 

18. Turner CF, Ku L, Rogers SM, Lindberg 

LD, Pleck JH, Sonenstein FL. Adolescent 

sexual behavior, drug use, and violence: 

Increased reporting with computer survey 
Page 6 National Health Statistics Reports  Number 83  September 24, 2015 

technology. Science 280(5365):867–73. 

1998. 

19. O’Reilly JM, Hubbard ML, Lessler JT, 

Biemer PP, Turner CF. Audio and video 

computer-assisted self interviewing: 

Preliminary tests of new technologies for 

data collection. J Off Stat 10(2):197–214. 

1994. 

20. U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services. Poverty guidelines. Available 

from: http://aspe.hhs.gov/povertyguidelines. 

21. Korn EL, Graubard BI. Confidence 

intervals for proportions with small 

expected number of positive counts 

estimated from survey data. Survey 

Methodol 24:193–201. 1998. 
National Health Statistics Reports  Number 83  September 24, 2015 Page 7 

Table 1. Sample description for ages 18–59, by demographic and high-risk groups: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 

2007–2012 

Variable Sample size Percent of sample population 95% CI 

Sex: 

Male . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,466 49 .6 48 .6–50 .7 

Female . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,466 50 .4 49 .3–51 .5 

Age (years): 

18–39 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,466 50 .8 48 .4–53 .2 

40–49 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,466 25 .3 24 .0–26 .7 

50–59 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,466 23 .9 21 .9–25 .9 

Race and Hispanic origin: 

Non-Hispanic white . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,466 64 .9 60 .2–69 .3 

Non-Hispanic black . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,466 11 .7 9 .7–14 .0 

Mexican American . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,466 9 .9 7 .6–12 .6 

All nonblack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,466 88 .3 86 .0–90 .4 

Education: 

Less than high school diploma or GED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,458 17 .8 15 .9–19 .6 

High school diploma or GED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,458 22 .1 20 .6–23 .7 

More than high school diploma or GED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,458 60 .2 57 .4–62 .9 

Poverty index ratio: 

Below PIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,615 17 .8 16 .0–19 .8 

At or above PIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,615 82 .2 80 .2–84 .1 

Current health insurance coverage? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,451 75 .0 73 .2–76 .8 

No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,451 25 .0 23 .2–26 .8 

Received health care in past 12 months? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,459 80 .4 79 .2–81 .5 

No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,459 19 .6 18 .5–20 .8 

Number of lifetime sexual partners: 

0–4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,151 40 .3 38 .6–42 .0 

5–9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,151 24 .9 23 .6–26 .3 

10 or more . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,151 34 .8 33 .1–36 .5 

Herpes simplex virus type 2 infection status1

: 

Positive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,796 17 .4 16 .2–18 .6 

Negative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,796 82 .7 81 .4–83 .8 

History of same-sex sexual contact? (men only): 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,642 5 .1 3 .9–6 .6 

No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,642 94 .9 93 .4–96 .1 

History of sexually transmitted infection?2 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,023 9 .0 8 .2–9 .9 

No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,023 91 .0 90 .1–91 .8 

Ever used injection or illicit drugs? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,246 20 .9 19 .4–22 .4 

No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,246 79 .1 77 .6–80 .6 

History of participation in any higher-risk group?1,3 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,808 52 .8 51 .4–54 .3 

No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,808 47 .2 45 .7–48 .6 

1

Measured only for ages 18–49 .
 

2

Includes a self-reported history of chlamydia or gonorrhea in the past 12 months or a self-reported history of ever having genital herpes or genital warts .
 

3

Includes those with 10 or more lifetime sexual partners, positive for herpes simplex virus type 2, with a history of same-sex sexual contact (men only), with a history of sexually transmitted infection, 


or with a history of injection or illicit drug use .
 

NOTE: CI is confidence interval, GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma, and PIR is poverty index ratio .
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007–2012 .
 
Page 8 National Health Statistics Reports  Number 83  September 24, 2015 

Table 2. Sample description for ages 50–59, by demographic and high-risk groups: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 

2007–2008 and 2009–2012 

Sample population aged 50-59, Sample population aged 50-59, 

2007–2008 2009–2012 

Variable Percent 95% CI Percent 95% CI P value1 

Sex: 

Male . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 .8 44 .9–52 .8 49 .7 46 .7–52 .8 NS 

Female . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 .2 47 .2–55 .1 50 .3 47 .2–53 .3 ... 

Race and Hispanic origin: 

Non-Hispanic white . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 .7 62 .7–79 .3 73 .1 67 .3–78 .3 NS 

Non-Hispanic black . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 .6 6 .8–16 .2 10 .9 8 .4–14 .0 ... 

Mexican American . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 .9 3 .4–10 .0 5 .6 3 .7–8 .3 ... 

All nonblack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 .4 83 .8–93 .2 89 .1 86 .0–91 .6 ... 

Education: 

Less than high school diploma or GED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 .1 13 .7–21 .2 16 .3 13 .5–19 .6 NS 

High school diploma or GED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 .7 21 .0–31 .0 22 .3 20 .0–24 .7 ... 

More than high school diploma or GED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 .2 50 .5–63 .7 61 .4 57 .4–65 .3 ... 

Poverty index ratio: 

Below PIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 .6 6 .0–12 .1 12 .3 10 .1–15 .0 NS 

At or above PIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 .4 87 .9–94 .0 87 .7 85 .0–89 .9 ... 

Current health insurance coverage? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 .8 82 .2–88 .7 81 .1 77 .8–84 .0 < 0 .05 

No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 .2 11 .3–17 .8 18 .9 16 .0–22 .2 ... 

Received health care in past 12 months? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 .4 84 .3–89 .9 85 .1 82 .2–87 .5 NS 

No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 .6 10 .1–15 .7 14 .9 12 .5–17 .8 ... 

Number of lifetime sexual partners: 

0–4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 .1 43 .8–50 .4 38 .0 34 .1–42 .1 < 0 .01 

5–9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 .5 22 .0–29 .3 26 .1 22 .7–29 .8 ... 

10 or more . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 .5 23 .1–32 .3 35 .9 31 .9–40 .0 ... 

History of same-sex sexual contact? (men only): 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 .5 2 .6–7 .7 5 .9 3 .3–10 .4 NS 

No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 .5 92 .3–97 .4 94 .1 89 .6–96 .7 ... 

History of sexually transmitted infection?2 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 .8 4 .4–10 .4 9 .2 7 .0–11 .9 NS 

No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 .2 89 .6–95 .6 90 .8 88 .1–93 .0 ... 

Ever used injection or illicit drugs? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 .1 15 .8–23 .0 25 .1 21 .5–29 .1 < 0 .05 

No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 .9 77 .0–84 .2 74 .9 70 .9–78 .5 ... 

... Category not applicable .
 1

P values < 0 .05, < 0 .01, or < 0 .001 from chi-square testing that compares the distribution of levels for each cofactor in NHANES 2007–2008 to the distribution in NHANES 2009–2012 .
 2

Includes a self-reported history of chlamydia or gonorrhea in the past 12 months or a self-reported history of ever having genital herpes or genital warts .
 

NOTE: CI is confidence interval; NS is not significant; GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma; PIR is poverty index ratio; and NHANES is the National Health and 


Nutrition Examination Survey .
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007–2012 .
 
 

 

National Health Statistics Reports  Number 83  September 24, 2015 Page 9 

Table 3. HIV prevalence for ages 18–59, by demographic and high-risk groups: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 

2007–2012 

Total HIV- Percent HIVVariable Sample size infected* infected 95% CI P value1 RSE* 

Overall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,466 52 0 .39 0 .22–0 .62 ... 23 

Sex: 

Male (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,119 40 0 .61 0 .34–1 .01 ... 26 

Female . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,347 12 0 .16 0 .07–0 .31 < 0 .01 38 

Age (years): 

18–39 (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,112 23 0 .24 0 .14–0 .39 ... 25 

40–49 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,699 17 0 .44 0 .21–0 .79 NS 30 

50–59 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,655 12 0 .64 0 .19–1 .54 NS 47 

Race and Hispanic origin: 

Non-Hispanic white . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,190 6 0 .19 0 .05–0 .52 < 0 .001 53 

Non-Hispanic black (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,208 34 1 .56 0 .96–2 .39 ... 22 

Mexican American . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,875 6 0 .39 0 .17–0 .75 < 0 .01 33 

All nonblack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,258 18 0 .23 0 .10–0 .46 < 0 .001 35 

Education: 

Less than high school diploma or GED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,640 14 0 .51 0 .25–0 .93 NS 31 

High school diploma or GED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,403 15 0 .60 0 .19–1 .40 NS 45 

More than high school diploma or GED (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,415 23 0 .27 0 .12–0 .53 ... 37 

Poverty index ratio: 

Below PIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,578 15 0 .49 0 .26–0 .84 NS 29 

At or above PIR (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,037 30 0 .35 0 .17–0 .63 ... 31 

Current health insurance coverage? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,029 41 0 .43 0 .23–0 .73 NS 28 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,422 11 0 .25 0 .12–0 .46 ... 32 

Received health care in past 12 months? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,144 47 0 .45 0 .25–0 .74 < 0 .05 27 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,315 5 0 .13 0 .04–0 .30 ... 46 

Number of lifetime sexual partners: 

0–4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,918 10 0 .14 0 .08–0 .25 < 0 .05 29 

5–9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,198 8 0 .21 0 .09–0 .41 < 0 .05 33 

10 or more (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,035 28 0 .68 0 .31–1 .29 ... 34 

Herpes simplex virus type 2 infection status2

: 

Positive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,777 28 1 .23 0 .67–2 .08 < 0 .01 27 

Negative (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,019 12 0 .11 0 .05–0 .22 ... 36 

History of same-sex sexual contact? (men only): 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227 22 7 .68 3 .5–14 .2 < 0 .01 33 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,415 15 0 .17 0 .08–0 .31 ... 29 

History of sexually transmitted infection?3 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 716 13 1 .76 0 .61–3 .94 < 0 .05 43 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,307 35 0 .23 0 .13–0 .37 ... 26 

Ever used injection or illicit drugs? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,711 17 0 .79 0 .29–1 .72 NS 41 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,535 31 0 .24 0 .15–0 .37 ... 21 

History of participation in any higher-risk group?2,4 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,163 36 0 .56 0 .33–0 .88 < 0 .001 23 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,645 3 0 .05 0 .01–0 .15 ... 60 

* RSE more than 40% and subgroups with fewer than 10 HIV-infected persons should be interpreted with caution due to possible estimate instability .
 

... Category not applicable .
 1

P values < 0 .05, < 0 .01, or < 0 .001 from t test comparing subgroup to reference group for each cofactor .
 2

Measured only for ages 18–49 .
 

3

Includes a self-reported history of chlamydia or gonorrhea in the past 12 months or a self-reported history of ever having genital herpes or genital warts .
 

4

Includes those with 10 or more lifetime sexual partners, positive for herpes simplex virus type 2, with a history of same-sex sexual contact (men only), with a history of sexually transmitted infection, 


or with a history of injection or illicit drug use .
 

NOTES: See Methods section for details on HIV prevalence calculations . CI is confidence interval; RSE is relative standard error; ref is the reference group used when comparing each cofactor; NS is 


not significant; GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma; and PIR is poverty index ratio .
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007–2012 .
 
 

 

Page 10 National Health Statistics Reports  Number 83  September 24, 2015 

Table 4. HIV prevalence for ages 18–59, by demographic and high-risk groups: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 

2009–2012 

Total HIV- Percent HIVVariable Sample size infected* infected 95% CI P value1 RSE* 

Overall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,660 40 0 .39 0 .21–0 .64 ... 26 

Sex: 

Male (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,746 29 0 .60 0 .31–1 .04 ... 28 

Female . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,914 11 0 .18 0 .08–0 .34 < 0 .05 33 

Age (years): 

18–39 (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,168 16 0 .26 0 .12–0 .49 NS 35 

40–49 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,837 12 0 .41 0 .22–0 .70 NS 27 

50–59 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,655 12 0 .64 0 .19–1 .54 ... 47 

Race and Hispanic origin: 

Non-Hispanic white . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,017 5 0 .18 0 .04–0 .52 < 0 .01 56 

Non-hispanic black (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,653 27 1 .66 0 .92–2 .74 ... 26 

Mexican American . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,273 5 0 .47 0 .20–0 .93 < 0 .01 36 

All nonblack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,007 13 0 .22 0 .09–0 .44 < 0 .01 36 

Education: 

Less than high school diploma or GED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,839 9 0 .46 0 .18–0 .98 NS 39 

High school diploma or GED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,699 11 0 .59 0 .18–1 .42 NS 46 

More than high school diploma or GED (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,115 20 0 .30 0 .12–0 .59 ... 37 

Poverty index ratio: 

Below PIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,911 11 0 .49 0 .24–0 .88 NS 31 

At or above PIR (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,110 23 0 .34 0 .16–0 .63 ... 32 

Current health insurance coverage? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,205 31 0 .41 0 .21–0 .74 NS 32 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,444 9 0 .31 0 .13–0 .60 ... 36 

Received health care in past 12 months? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,017 37 0 .45 0 .24–0 .78 < 0 .05 29 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,636 3 0 .12 0 .02–0 .37 ... 58 

Number of lifetime sexual partners: 

0–4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,723 7 0 .15 0 .06–0 .30 < 0 .05 33 

5–9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,645 7 0 .25 0 .10–0 .53 NS 40 

10 or more (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,251 21 0 .67 0 .28–1 .37 ... 37 

Herpes simplex virus type 2 infection status2

: 

Positive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,167 21 1 .37 0 .63–2 .58 < 0 .01 33 

Negative (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,826 7 0 .09 0 .03–0 .20 ... 44 

History of same-sex sexual contact? (men only): 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 15 7 .17 2 .80–14 .60 < 0 .05 38 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,223 11 0 .18 0 .07–0 .38 ... 39 

History of sexually transmitted infections?3 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 516 11 1 .81 0 .63–4 .03 < 0 .05 43 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,952 26 0 .24 0 .11–0 .45 ... 33 

Ever used injection or illicit drugs? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,212 14 0 .76 0 .25–1 .75 NS 43 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,474 23 0 .28 0 .16–0 .45 ... 25 

History of participation in any higher-risk group?2,4 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,782 25 0 .59 0 .30–1 .06 < 0 .05 31 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,430 3 0 .08 0 .02–0 .24 ... 63 

* RSE more than 40% and subgroups with fewer than 10 HIV-infected persons should be interpreted with caution due to possible estimate instability .
 

... Category not applicable .
 1

P values < 0 .05, < 0 .01, or < 0 .001 from t test comparing subgroup to reference group for each cofactor .
 2

Measured only for ages 18–49 .
 

3

Includes a self-reported history of chlamydia or gonorrhea in the past 12 months or a self-reported history of ever having genital herpes or genital warts .
 

4

Includes those with 10 or more lifetime sexual partners, positive for herpes simplex virus type 2, with a history of same-sex sexual contact (men only), with a history of sexually transmitted infection, 


or with a history of injection or illicit drug use .
 

NOTE: CI is confidence interval; RSE is relative standard error; ref is the reference group used when comparing each cofactor; NS is not significant; GED is General Educational Development high 


school equivalency diploma; and PIR is poverty index ratio .
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2009–2012 .
 
National Health Statistics Reports  Number 83  September 24, 2015 Page 11 

Table 5. Prevalence of antiretroviral use among HIV-infected aged 18–59, by demographic and high-risk groups: National Health and 

Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007–2012 

Number of Number of ARV Percent using 

HIV-infected in users among ARV among Degrees of 

Variable sample* HIV-infected* HIV-infected 95% CI freedom1 RSE* 

Overall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 20 51 .9 32 .5–70 .9 7 18 

Sex: 

Male (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 18 61 .5 38 .6–81 .2 5 17 

Female . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2 16 .7 1 .8–50 .4 0 68 

Age (years): 

18–39 (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 5 22 .9 7 .9–45 .6 1 39 

40–49 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 8 45 .2 18 .9–73 .6 1 30 

50–59 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7 80 .1 54 .0–95 .1 1 12 

Race and Hispanic origin: 

Non-Hispanic white . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4 88 .4 55 .8–99 .4 0 11 

Non-Hispanic black (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 10 30 .7 18 .6–45 .1 5 21 

Mexican American . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2 40 .9 3 .6–89 .7 1 61 

All nonblack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 10 70 .9 39 .9–92 .0 2 18 

Education: 

Less than high school diploma or GED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8 65 .3 36 .3–87 .7 2 19 

High school diploma or GED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 3 45 .5 6 .8–89 .3 0 51 

More than high school diploma or GED (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 9 49 .6 25 .6–73 .8 2 24 

Poverty index ratio: 

Below PIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 8 54 .5 23 .1–83 .4 1 28 

At or above PIR (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 11 56 .0 32 .0–78 .1 3 20 

Current health insurance coverage? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 18 58 .7 39 .1–76 .6 5 16 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2 16 .2 1 .9–48 .1 0 66 

Received health care in past 12 months? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 20 55 .5 36 .3–73 .6 6 16 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 0 0 0 .0–97 .5 0 ... 

Number of lifetime sexual partners: 

0–4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 0 0 0 .0–97 .5 2 ... 

5–9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1 11 .9 0 .3–51 .1 0 95 

10 or more (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 14 62 .8 35 .9–84 .8 3 19 

Herpes simplex virus type 2 infection status2

: 

Positive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 11 43 .3 22 .8–65 .7 2 24 

Negative (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2 10 .6 2 .0–29 .3 1 58 

History of same-sex sexual contact? (men only): 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 11 65 .0 33 .9–88 .7 1 21 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 4 27 .0 9 .1–53 .0 1 39 

History of sexually transmitted infections?3 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 9 79 .7 47 .8–96 .6 0 15 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 8 21 .6 9 .4–38 .9 2 33 

Ever used injection or illicit drugs? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 9 71 .6 38 .6–93 .1 1 19 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 8 25 .7 8 .7–50 .9 4 39 

History of participation in any higher-risk group?2,4 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 13 38 .7 20 .7–59 .3 2 24 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 0 0 0 .0–97 .5 0 ... 

* RSE more than 40% and subgroups with fewer than 10 HIV-infected persons should be interpreted with caution due to possible estimate instability .
 

... Category not applicable .
 1

Degrees of freedom less than 10 are associated with unstable estimates of the standard error .
 

2

Measured only for ages 18–49 .
 

3

Includes a self-reported history of chlamydia or gonorrhea in the past 12 months or a self-reported history of ever having genital herpes or genital warts .
 

4

Includes those with 10 or more lifetime sexual partners, positive for herpes simplex virus type 2, with a history of same-sex sexual contact (men only), with a history of sexually transmitted infection, 


or with a history of injection or illicit drug use .
 

NOTE: ARV is antiretroviral; CI is confidence interval; RSE is relative standard error; ref is the reference group used when comparing each cofactor; GED is General Educational Development high 


school equivalency diploma; and PIR is poverty index ratio .
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007–2012 .
 
Page 12 National Health Statistics Reports  Number 83  September 24, 2015 

Table 6. Prevalence of any lifetime history of HIV testing among HIV-infected aged 18–59, by demographic and high-risk groups: National 

Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007–2012 

Percent with any 

Number of Number Number HIV testing 

HIV-infected in with any HIV without HIV among Degrees of 

Variable sample* testing* testing* HIV-infected 95% CI freedom1 RSE*,2 

Overall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 43 7 86 .1 69 .5–95 .7 6 44 

Sex: 

Male (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 35 3 94 .1 81 .7–99 .1 4 64 

Female . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8 4 61 .0 24 .9–89 .8 0 42 

Age (years): 

18–39 (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 21 2 90 .7 68 .7–99 .0 1 71 

40–49 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 12 5 67 .2 36 .9–89 .6 1 39 

50–59 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 10 0 100 69 .2–100 .0 0 ... 

Race and Hispanic origin: 

Non-Hispanic white . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4 0 100 39 .8–100 .0 0 ... 

Non-Hispanic black (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 31 3 90 .5 72 .8–98 .4 5 60 

Mexican American . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3 3 59 .9 12 .0–96 .0 1 59 

All nonblack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 12 4 81 .2 50 .4–96 .9 1 58 

Education: 

Less than high school diploma or GED . . . . . . . . . . 14 13 1 94 .9 74 .0–99 .9 2 100 

High school diploma or GED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 10 5 72 .0 34 .0–95 .2 0 54 

More than high school diploma or GED (ref) . . . . . . 21 20 1 94 .9 75 .5–99 .8 1 94 

Poverty index ratio: 

Below PIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 12 3 81 .7 49 .0–97 .5 1 62 

At or above PIR (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 25 3 88 .8 65 .6–98 .5 2 66 

Current health insurance coverage? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 35 4 89 .4 71 .1–98 .0 4 57 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 8 3 71 .1 35 .7–93 .8 0 50 

Received health care in past 12 months? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 41 4 89 .8 73 .0–97 .9 5 55 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2 3 38 .7 4 .7–84 .8 0 36 

Number of lifetime sexual partners: 

0–4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6 4 59 .7 24 .9–88 .4 2 40 

5–9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8 0 100 63 .1–100 .0 0 ... 

10 or more (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 26 2 94 .3 78 .9–99 .5 3 76 

Herpes simplex virus type 2 infection status3

: 

Positive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 24 4 86 .8 65 .8–97 .2 2 54 

Negative (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 9 3 62 .7 27 .7–89 .9 1 42 

History of same-sex sexual contact? (men only): 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 22 0 100 84 .6–100 .0 1 ... 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 12 3 79 .1 48 .3–96 .0 1 54 

History of sexually transmitted infections?4 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 13 0 100 75 .3–100 .0 0 ... 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 29 6 82 .0 62 .6–94 .0 2 41 

Ever used injection or illicit drugs? 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 16 1 97 .2 84 .0–100 .0 1 105 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 26 5 83 .5 61 .4–95 .8 4 48 

History of participation in any higher-risk group?3,5 

Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 31 5 87 .0 69 .5–96 .5 2 48 

No (ref) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 1 60 .7 6 .2–98 .7 0 74 

* RSE more than 40% and subgroups with fewer than 10 HIV-infected persons should be interpreted with caution due to possible estimate instability .
 

... Category not applicable .
 1

Degrees of freedom less than 10 are associated with unstable estimates of the standard error .
 

2

RSE corresponds to the percentage without HIV testing among HIV-infected persons, because this is a small sample compared to the percentage with any HIV testing among those HIV-infected, 


demonstrating the relative instability of the estimate .
 

3

Measured only for ages 18–49 .
 

4

Includes a self-reported history of chlamydia or gonorrhea in the past 12 months or a self-reported history of ever having genital herpes or genital warts .
 

5

Includes those with 10 or more lifetime sexual partners, positive for herpes simplex virus type 2, with a history of same-sex sexual contact (men only), with a history of sexually transmitted infection, 


or with a history of injection or illicit drug use .
 

NOTE: CI is confidence interval; RSE is relative standard error; ref is the reference group used when comparing each cofactor; GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency 


diploma; and PIR is poverty index ratio .
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007–2012 .
 
National Health Statistics Reports  Number 83  September 24, 2015	 Page 13 

Technical Notes 

List of classes of 

antiretroviral medications 

used by HIV-infected 

participants in National 

Health and Nutrition 

Examination Survey, 

2007–2012 

●	 Antiviral chemokine receptor 

antagonists 

●	 Antiviral combinations 

●	 Antiviral interferons 

●	 Integrase strand transfer inhibitors 

●	 Non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase 

inhibitors 

●	 Nucleotide reverse transcriptase 

inhibitors 

●	 Protease inhibitors 

●	 Purine inhibitors 
National Health Statistics Reports  Number 83  September 24, 2015

For e-mail updates on NCHS publication releases, subscribe online at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/govdelivery.htm.

For questions or general information about NCHS: Tel: 1–800–CDC–INFO (1–800–232–4636) • TTY: 1–888–232–6348

Internet: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs • Online request form: http://www.cdc.gov/cdc/info

DHHS Publication No. 2015–1250 • CS258765

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

National Center for Health Statistics

3311 Toledo Road

Hyattsville, MD 20782–2064

OFFICIAL BUSINESS 

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300

For more NCHS NHSRs, visit:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/nhsr.htm.

MEDIA MAIL

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

CDC/NCHS

PERMIT NO. G-284

Acknowledgments 

The authors would like to thank Ryne Paulose and Clifford Johnson of the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), Division of Health 

and Nutrition Examination Surveys, as well as Alan Dorfman and Hee Choon Shin of the NCHS Office of Research Methodology, for critically 

reviewing this report. 

Suggested citation

Woodring J, Kruszon-Moran D, McQuillan G. 

HIV infection in U.S. household population 

aged 18–59: Data from National Health and 

Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007–2012. 

National health statistics reports; no 83. 

Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health 

Statistics. 2015.

Copyright information

All material appearing in this report is in the 

public domain and may be reproduced or 

copied without permission; citation as to 

source, however, is appreciated.

National Center for Health Statistics

Charles J. Rothwell, M.S, M.B.A., Director

Nathaniel Schenker, Ph.D., Deputy Director

Jennifer H. Madans, Ph.D., Associate Director 

for Science

Division of Health and Nutrition 

Examination Surveys

Kathryn S. Porter, M.D., M.S., Director