A glimmer of hope? Evaluation of time for non-genitourinary medicine physicians to diagnose HIV infection in patients presenting with HIV-related illness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study conducted in 2002-2003 at three UK south coast hospitals measuring the length of time for non-genitourinary medicine physicians to diagnose HIV when patients presented with an HIV-related illness, found a median time to diagnosis of four days with 70% of diagnoses being made within seven days. This retrospective cohort study of all patients newly diagnosed with HIV between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2011 was conducted at the same three hospitals. Thirty-seven patients were newly diagnosed with HIV in non-genitourinary (GU) medicine inpatient and outpatient settings (24 men, 13 women), with a mean age of 43 years. The median time to diagnosis was one day (interquartile range of 0-4 days), with 81% of diagnoses made within seven days of first presentation. Late diagnosis of HIV remains a significant challenge, but delayed diagnosis in a patient admitted with an HIV-related illness is reducing in this setting.
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 | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".