Dynamics of cognitive change in <scp>HIV</scp>‐infected individuals commencing three different initial antiretroviral regimens: a randomized, controlled study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Improvements in neurocognitive (NC) function have been associated with commencing antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected subjects. However, the dynamics of such improvements are poorly understood. METHODS: We assessed changes in NC function via a validated computerized battery (CogState™, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia) at baseline and after 24 and 48 weeks in a subset of therapy-naïve neuro-asymptomatic HIV-infected subjects, randomized to commence three different antiretroviral regimens. RESULTS: Of 28 subjects enrolled in the study, nine, eight and 11 were randomly allocated to commence tenofovir/emtricitabine with efavirenz (arm 1), atazanavir/ritonavir (arm 2) and zidovudine/abacavir (arm 3), respectively. Overall improvements in NC function were observed at week 24 and function continued to improve at week 48 (changes in z-score for overall cognitive global score of 0.16 and 0.18 at weeks 24 and 48, respectively). Within the NC speed domains, generally greater improvements were observed in arms 2 and 3, compared with arm 1 (changes in z-score for composite speed scores at weeks 24/48 of 0.16/0.16, -0.29/-0.24 and -0.15/-0.31 in arms 1, 2 and 3, respectively; P = 0.04 for change at week 48 in arm 3 versus arm 1). Finally, improvements in executive function occurred later (only observed at week 48) and were driven by improvements in arm 3 (z-score changes of 0.23, 0.06 and -0.78 in arms 1, 2 and 3, respectively; P = 0.02 for change in arm 3 versus arm 1). CONCLUSION: Improvements in NC function continue over the first year after initiating antiretroviral therapy in neuro-asymptomatic HIV-infected subjects.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".