Engagement with Care, Substance Use, and Adherence to Therapy in HIV/AIDS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Engagement with care for those living with HIV is aimed at establishing a strong relationship between patients and their health care provider and is often associated with greater adherence to therapy and treatment (Flickinger, Saha, Moore, and Beach, 2013). Substance use behaviors are linked with lower rates of engagement with care and medication adherence (Horvath, Carrico, Simoni, Boyer, Amico, and Petroli, 2013). This study is a secondary data analysis using a cross-sectional design from a larger randomized controlled trial (n = 775) that investigated the efficacy of a self-care symptom management manual for participants living with HIV. Participants were recruited from countries of Africa and the US. This study provides evidence that substance use is linked with lower self-reported engagement with care and adherence to therapy. Data on substance use and engagement are presented. Clinical implications of the study address the importance of utilizing health care system and policy factors to improve engagement with care.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".