Risk of cardiovascular disease in HIV, hepatitis C, or HIV/hepatitis C patients compared to the general population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As a result of effective antiretroviral therapy HIV patients are living longer, and their risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a growing concern. It remains unknown whether coinfection with hepatitis C (HCV) changes an HIV person's CVD risk, and how the risks compare to the general population. The objective of this study was to compare the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) and vascular age differences in persons with HIV, HCV or HIV/HCV disease to the general population. METHODS: HIV, HCV, and HIV/HCV patients with clinic visits between 2004 and 2009 were sampled from medical clinics in Rochester, NY. Uninfected persons were randomly selected from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), and individually matched on gender, race, and age. We stratified by infection group and conducted separate multivariable linear regression analyses between each infection group and the gender, race, and age matched participants from NHANES. RESULTS: Rochester patients (HIV = 239, HCV = 167, HIV/HCV = 182) were compared 3 : 1 with the NHANES participants. After controlling for weight, marital status, current pharmacotherapies and the matching variables of gender, race, and age, HIV/HCV patients had a 2% higher general FRS compared with the general population (p = 0.03), and vascular age differences that were 4.1 years greater (p = .01). HCV patients had a 2.4% higher general FRS than the general population (p < .001), and vascular age differences that were 4.4 years greater (p < .001). CVD risk was elevated but not significantly different between HIV patients and the general population. CONCLUSION: Cardiovascular disease risk is elevated among HIV/HCV and HCV infected persons compared with the general population.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".