Non‐<scp>HIV</scp>‐related health care utilization, demographic, clinical and laboratory factors associated with time to initial retention in<scp>HIV</scp>care among<scp>HIV</scp>‐positive individuals linked to<scp>HIV</scp>care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to explore non-HIV-related health care service (NHRHS) utilization, demographic, clinical and laboratory factors associated with timely initial "retention" in HIV care among individuals "linked" to HIV care in British Columbia (BC), Canada. METHODS: We conducted a Weibull time-to-initial-retention analysis among BC Seek and Treat for Optimal Prevention of HIV/AIDS (STOP HIV/AIDS) cohort participants linked in 2000-2010, who had ≥ 1 year of follow-up. We defined "linked" as the first HIV-related service accessed following HIV diagnosis and "retained" as having, within a calendar year, either: (i) at least two HIV-related physician visits/diagnostic tests or (ii) at least two antiretroviral therapy (ART) dispensations, ≥ 3 months apart. Individuals were followed until they were retained, died, their last contact date, or until 31 December 2011, whichever occurred first. RESULTS: Of 5231 linked individuals (78% male; median age 39: (Q1-Q3: 32-46) years], 4691 (90%) were retained [median time to initial retention of 9 (Q1-Q3: 5-13) months] by the end of follow-up and 540 (10%) were not. Eighty-four per cent of not retained and 96% of retained individuals used at least one type of NHRHS during follow-up. Individuals who saw a specialist for NHRHS during follow-up had a shorter time to initial retention than those who did not [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 2.79; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.47-3.16]. However, those who saw a general practitioner (GP) for NHRHS (aHR 0.79; 95% CI: 0.74-0.84) and those admitted to the hospital for NHRHS (aHR 0.60; 95% CI: 0.54-0.67), versus those who did/were not, respectively, had longer times to initial retention, as did female patients, people who inject drugs (PWID) and individuals < 40 years old. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 84% of not retained individuals used some type of NHRHS during follow-up. Given that 71% of not retained individuals used GP NHRHS, our results suggest that GP-targeted interventions may be effective in improving time to initial retention.
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 | 0.004 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".