MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994173378 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0092334

Gender Inequities in Quality of Care among HIV-Positive Individuals Initiating Antiretroviral Treatment in British Columbia, Canada (2000–2010)

2014· article· en· W1994173378 on OpenAlexaffabout
Allison Carter, Jeong Eun Min, William Chau, Viviane D. Lima, Mary Kestler, Neora Pick, Deborah Money, Julio Montaner, Robert S. Hogg, Angela Kaida

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsB.C. Women's Hospital & Health CentreWomen's Health Research InstituteUniversity of British ColumbiaAIDS VancouverSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDemographyLogistic regressionRegimenViral loadAntiretroviral therapyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Internal medicineGerontologyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: We measured gender differences in "Quality of Care" (QOC) during the first year after initiation of antiretroviral therapy and investigated factors associated with poorer QOC among women. DESIGN: QOC was estimated using the Programmatic Compliance Score (PCS), a validated metric associated with all-cause mortality, among all patients (≥19 years) who initiated ART in British Columbia, Canada (2000-2010). METHODS: PCS includes six indicators of non-compliance with treatment initiation guidelines at baseline (not having drug resistance testing before treatment; starting on a non-recommended regimen; starting therapy at CD4<200 cells/mm3) and during first-year follow-up (receiving <3 CD4 tests; receiving <3 viral load tests; not achieving viral suppression within six months). Summary scores range from 0-6; higher scores indicate poorer QOC. Multivariable ordinal logistic regression was used to measure if female gender was an independent predictor of poorer QOC and factors associated with poorer QOC among women. RESULTS: QOC was determined for 3,642 patients (20% women). At baseline: 42% of women (34% men) did not have resistance testing before treatment; 17% of women (9% men) started on a non-recommended regimen (all p<0.001). At follow-up: 17% of women (11% men) received <3 CD4; 17% of women (11% men) received <3 VL; 50% of women (41% men) did not achieve viral suppression (all p<0.001). Overall, QOC was better among men (mean PSC = 1.54 (SD = 1.30)) compared with women (mean = 1.89 (SD = 1.37); p<0.001). In the multivariable model, female gender (AOR = 1.16 [95% CI: 0.99-1.35]; p = 0.062) remained associated with poorer QOC after covariate adjustment. Among women, those with injection drug use history, of Aboriginal ancestry, from Vancouver Island, and who initiated ART in earlier years were more likely to have poorer QOC. CONCLUSIONS: Poorer QOC among women, especially from marginalized communities, demands that barriers undermining women's access to high-quality care be addressed to improve treatment and health for women with HIV.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations56
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207