Cognitive function, mood and health‐related quality of life in hepatitis C virus (HCV)‐monoinfected and HIV/HCV‐coinfected individuals commencing HCV treatment<sup>*</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to examine cognitive function, mood and health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and their interrelationships, among hepatitis C virus (HCV)-monoinfected and HIV/HCV-coinfected individuals. METHODS: Baseline neuropsychological and HRQOL measures of HCV-monoinfected and HIV/HCV-coinfected individuals commencing HCV treatment were examined from a prospective cohort study conducted between April 2003 and August 2005 in Sydney, Australia. Participants' neuropsychological performance and HRQOL were measured using computer-based battery, Trail Making Tests (TMT), Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS), the Hepatitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (HQLQ), and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Neuropsychological measures of HCV-infected patient groups were compared with those of two control groups consisting of HIV-monoinfected and uninfected individuals. RESULTS: Similar cognitive function, mood and HRQOL were found in HCV-monoinfected (n=19) and HIV/HCV-coinfected (n=15) individuals. When compared with the HIV-monoinfected (n=30) and uninfected control (n=30) groups, subtle cognitive impairment in attention was found in the HIV/HCV-coinfected group (P<0.05). Twenty-one percent of the HCV-monoinfected group were classified as having cognitive impairment compared with 10% or less in the other groups. Sociodemographic characteristics, mood, HRQOL and HCV indices did not correlate with cognitive function. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate no statistically significant difference in neuropsychological and HRQOL impairments between HIV/HCV-coinfected individuals with nonadvanced HIV disease and HCV-monoinfected individuals. This lack of significant difference may relate to the relatively small study 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".