MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019117447 · doi:10.1080/09595230600883313

Impact of HIV testing on uptake of HIV therapy among antiretroviral naive HIV-infected injection drug users

2006· article· en· W2019117447 on OpenAlexafffund
Evan Wood, Thomas Kerr, Robert S. Hogg, Anita Palepu, Ruth Zhang, Steffanie A. Strathdee, Julio Montaner

Bibliographic record

VenueDrug and Alcohol Review · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaAIDS VancouverSt. Paul's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth CanadaNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute on Drug AbuseUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsMedicineProportional hazards modelHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Antiretroviral therapyReceiptCohortHazard ratioPublic healthInternal medicineCohort studyViral loadFamily medicineConfidence intervalPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Improving access to antiretroviral therapy among injection drug users remains an urgent public health concern. We examined the time to antiretroviral therapy (ART) use among antiretroviral naive HIV-infected injection drug users who were unaware of their HIV status to examine the impact of receipt of HIV test results on uptake of ART. Time to ART use was examined using Kaplan - Meier methods, and factors associated with the time to ART were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards regression. Between May 1996 and May 2003, 312 HIV-infected individuals were enrolled into the Barriers to Antiretroviral Therapy (BART) cohort, among whom 105 (33.7%) reported not knowing their HIV status at baseline. At 24 months post-baseline, those participants who returned for test results within 8 months initiated ART at a significantly elevated rate [adjusted relative hazard = 1.87 (95% CI: 1.05 - 3.33)]. These findings demonstrate the potential to improve uptake of ART among injection drug users through targeted HIV testing and counselling initiatives that encourage the receipt of HIV test results, and suggest that strategies to improve awareness of HIV infection may improve access to antiretroviral therapy.

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)0.000
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 score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations12
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrug and Alcohol ReviewSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207