Hospitalization for Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Alberta Patients with Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection: A Case Control Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To determine whether outcomes of pneumonia among human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive persons differed from those among HIV-negative persons. METHODS: Alberta hospital patient abstracts for HIV-positive per-sons requiring hospitalization for pneumonia from April 1, 1994,until March 31, 1999, were matched by age and sex with four HIV-negative counterparts. RESULTS: Hospitalizations for community-acquired pneumonia decreased for those with HIV (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome[AIDS]) and increased for those with HIV (non-AIDS) during the study period. HIV (AIDS) patients admitted for community-acquired pneumonia (n=130) manifested three times higher odds for a longer length of hospital stay and had three and 10 times higher odds for excess in-hospital and one-year mortality, respectively, than their matched controls. Similarly, HIV (non-AIDS) patients admitted for community-acquired pneumonia (n=46) manifested two times high-er odds for a longer length of hospital stay and had four times higher odds for excess one-year mortality than their matched controls. The in-hospital and one-year mortality rates for the HIV (AIDS) patients were 21.2% and 64.3%, respectively, during the first three years, and decreased to 8.7% and 40.7%, respectively, in the last two years of the study. CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes for community-acquired pneumonia were worse for those with HIV (non-AIDS) and HIV (AIDS)compared with non-HIV hospitalized patients matched for age and sex, and controlling for severity of illness and comorbidity. In-hospital and one-year mortality rates for patients with HIV (AIDS)showed a marked decline over the study period.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".